aka defi jana princessa video

Transcription

Kretanja
Movements
23 24
ČA SOPIS ZA PLESN U U MJETN OST
D A N C E MA G A ZIN E
sadržajl contents:
04
62
uvodnik/editorial
Mira Muhoberac
Osluškivanje vlastitosti
Katja Šimunić
O predstavi U prostoru bez. Ana-Marije
08
Bogdanović i Marine Petković Liker
Iva Nerina Sibila
68
Kako presložiti pojmove i preokrenuti noć-dan u
Krećem od tišine koja je u svima nama...
Razgovor s Ana-Marijom Bogdanović
dan-noć
O predstavi Pokret-ač, u koreografiji Aleksandre
76
14
Neka nova sloboda
Razgovor s Brankom Bankovićem
Listening to the Self
On the dance performance In a Space Without. by
Janeve Imfeld i Studija za suvremeni ples
Ana-Maria Bogdanović and Marina Petković Liker
82
My Starting Point Is the Silence Within All of Us...
A conversation with Ana-Maria Bogdanović
24
30
How to Rearrange Notions and Turn the NightDay into Day-Night
On the performance Move-r, choreographed
by Aleksandra Janeva Imfeld and the
Studio – Contemporary Dance Company
A New Kind of Freedom
Interview with Branko Banković
42
92
Maja Đurinović
Sve dok ne dodirneš sebe / Izvan granica tijela
O predstavi Ti Plesne skupine Masa
Razgovor s Aleksandrom Mišić i Ognjenom
Vučinićem
98
46
Until You Touch Yourself / Outside the
Boundaries of the Body
Vedrana Klepica
Sabotaža kiča
On the show You by the Masa Dance Company
O predstavi Sola Renate Carole Gatice i Zrinke
A Conversation with Aleksandra Mišić and Ognjen
Lukčec Kiko
Vučinić
Unutarnja ispunjenost plesom
Razgovor sa Zrinkom Lukčec Kiko
106
Ivana Slunjski
52
A Sabotage of Kitsch
Renata Carola Gatica and Zrinka Lukčec Kiko’s Sola
56
An Inner Fulfilment through Dance
A conversation with Zrinka Lukčec Kiko
U potrazi za drugim: solo koji to odbija biti
O izvedbi Dokle god smo zajedno Silvije Marchig
110 Nije vrijeme za bavljenje trivijalnostima
Razgovor sa Silvijom Marchig
122 In Search of the Other:
The Solo That Refuses to Be One
196
Jelena Mihelčić
On the performance As Long as We’re Together
O izloženosti i trajanju
by Silvia Marchig
O predstavama Varijacije o osjetnom Marjane
126 This is No Time for Trivialities
An interview with Silvia Marchig
Krajač i Nečastive Brune Isakovića
200 Dopustiti si promatranje
Razgovor s Lanom Hosni
140
Nataša Govedić
206 On Exposure and Duration
Plesom misliti ples:
On Performances Variations on Sensitive by
Marjana Krajač, and Denuded by Bruno Isaković
uz izvedbe Sonje Pregrad
146 Neovladani pokret i nezaklonjeno su/bivanje
210 Allow Yourself to Watch
An interview with Lana Hosni
Razgovor sa Sonjom Pregrad
154 Thinking Dancing through Dancing:
on Sonja Pregrad’s performances
160 Unmastered Movement and Unsheltered Co/Being
An interview with Sonja Pregrad
216
Katja Šimunić
Blistavo samorazaranje Ane Arkadjevne Karenjine
O baletu Ana Karenjina u koreografiji Lea Mujića
222 Poput obične prolaznice na ulici, a zapravo Labud
168
Razgovor s Edinom Pličanić
Dejan Košćak
Svijest tijela i tjelesnost svijesti
O predstavi Tijelo Mirjane Preis
172 Ne moramo uvijek shvatiti sve
Razgovor s Inom Sladić
230 Brilliant Self-Destruction of Anna Arkadyevna
Karenina
On the ballet Anna Karenina choreographed by
Leo Mujić
236 Like an Ordinary Passer-By in the Street and
182 Consciousness of the Body and Corporeality
of Consciousness
On the performance Body by Mirjana Preis
186 We Don’t Always Have to Understand Everything
A Conversation with Ina Sladić
Actually a Swan
An interview with Edina Pličanić
uvodnik:
P
lesačice i plesači, njihovo znanje i zvanje, njihova sjećanja i mišljenja, proces
plesačkoga rada, reminiscencije na koreografe s kojima su surađivali, na
koreografije koje su plesali i koje su utkale u njihova tijela, osjetljive arhive
krhkih plesnih gesta i plesnih predstava koje po definiciji nastaju u nestajanju,
u središtu su zanimanja ovoga dvobroja Kretanja. Hubert Godard piše kako je
„uznemirujuće vidjeti do koje nam mjere povijest ostavlja brojne tragove s obzirom
na kostimografa, glazbenika, koreografa, ali ostaje potpuno nijema u odnosu na
plesača i njegov rad, njegovo usavršavanje, tjelesne tehnike, ukratko, u odnosu na
stvarne temelje plesa (Le geste et sa perception/Gesta i njezina percepcija, 1998).
Upravo stoga razgovaramo s plesačicama i plesačima koji djeluju, tjeluju, misle
pokret na hrvatskoj plesnoj sceni, a svakome razgovoru prethodi tekst o aktualnoj predstavi u kojoj plešu, da bi se ocrtao stvaralački kontekst u koji su recentno
uronjeni. Budući da je sadašnja hrvatska plesna praksa prepoznatljiva ne samo na
domicilnim izvedbenim toposima nego i na gostovanjima predstava na festivalima
te rezidencijama naših umjetnika u inozemnim plesnim institucijama, sve češće
i u međunarodnim koprodukcijskim umrežavanjima, te postaje vidljivim dijelom
europske umjetničke plesne scene, a s druge su strane povijest hrvatske plesne
scene i teorijska refleksija o njoj gotovo posve nepoznati europskim gledateljima/
čitateljima, redakcija Kretanja odlučila je od ovoga dvobroja časopis kontinuirano
tiskati dvojezično, na hrvatskome i engleskome.
I dosad smo u određenim vremenskim razmacima objavljivali Kretanja na engleskome (2006, 2010) i jedno izdanje na francuskome (2011), no komunikacija i
dinamičniji i frekventniji dijalog s međunarodnim gledateljima i čitateljima putem
dvojezičnog izdanja čine nam se nužnim da bi se ojačala vidljivost i čitljivost najpropulzivnijih ostvarenja hrvatske plesne prakse i teorije.
Dvobroj otvaramo tekstom plesne kritičarke Ive Nerine Sibile o predstavi Pokret-ač, u koreografiji Aleksandre Janeve Imfeld, kao uvod u razgovor s Brankom
Bankovićem, dugogodišnjim plesačem Studija za suvremeni ples iz Zagreba. Branko
Banković je za svoj tridesetogodišnji plesni rad u listopadu ove godine primio posebno priznanje dviju strukovnih organizacija suvremenog plesa, Udruge plesnih
umjetnika Hrvatske i Udruge profesionalnih plesnih umjetnika Puls, a u zrelosti svoga
plesačkoga parkura i dalje se odvažuje na smjele izvedbene istupe i plesna ispitivanja.
Dramaturginja i dramska spisateljica Vedrana Klepica u tekstu o predstavi Sola
razmatra hibrid plesnoga teatra i performansa kao svojevrsnog hommagea Almodóvarovoj filmskoj poetici, nastalog suradnjom karijerne plesačice Zrinke Lukčec
Kiko i kazališne redateljice Renate Carole Gatice. Tekstu slijedi razgovor sa Zrinkom
Lukčec Kiko koja na postajama svoga plesačkoga rada razmatra, kako sama kaže,
tjelesnu inteligenciju na djelu.
O samozatajnoj plesačici i autorici profinjene introspektivne plesne poetike AnaMariji Bogdanović, o njezinu solu naslova U prostoru bez. (u suradnji s redateljicom
Marinom Petković Liker), piše teatrologinja Mira Muhoberac. Iscrpni razgovor s
Ana-Marijom Bogdanović raskriva ne samo duboko osobnu priču plesačice i autorice nego objektivizira i dio hrvatskoga plesnog pejzaža od osamdesetih godina
20. stoljeća do danas.
4 _ Kretanja 23 | 24
uvodnik: Plesna kritičarka i povjesničarka Maja Đurinović u razgovoru s plesačicom
Aleksandrom Mišić i plesačem Ognjenom Vučinićem, koji su zajedničko odrastanje na sceni pretvorili u autofikcijsko koreografsko djelo naslova Ti, donosi njihov
intimistički plesačko-koreografski postupak u radu na toj predstavi.
Sa Silvijom Marchig, elokventnom plesačicom i autoricom koja ples beskompromisno živi i radi, u minucioznu razgovoru s njom suočava nas plesna kritičarka i
teoretičarka Ivana Slunjski. Razgovoru prethodi tekst o solu Dokle god smo zajedno, za tu autoricu netipičnoj izvedbenoj formi, kontekstno poduprtom tematikom
bolnoga mjesta i performativnim događanjem Četverorukost – mala izvedbena
konferencija, usredotočenim na izravan dijalog s publikom i zajedničko traženje
mogućnosti individualnoga i društvenog iscjeljenja.
Teatrologinja Nataša Govedić piše o izvedbama Sonje Pregrad, jedne od najdojmljivijih suvremenih hrvatskih plesačica/izvođačica/autorica, posebice izdvajajući
performans Identity MOVE. Project!, Rearranging (and) the self-arranged koji je
izvela s vizualnom umjetnicom Nives Sertić. Nataša Govedić piše o Sonji Pregrad
kao o plesnoj umjetnici koju zanima tijelo „koje misli i svoju kinetiku i svoju afektivnu jezgru i svoja ideologijska punjenja”.
O predstavi Mirjane Preis Tijelo, nastaloj kao solo za plesačicu Inu Sladić koja
nakon početnoga obrazovanja u klasičnom baletu i preko, primjerice, suradnje s
Marinom Abramović danas oblikuje zanimljivi vlastiti izvođački i autorski izraz,
piše povjesničar umjetnosti Dejan Košćak.
Plesna kritičarka Jelena Mihelčić supostavila je Varijacije o osjetnom u koreografiji Marjane Krajač i Nečastive u koreografiji Brune Isakovića, dvije predstave
u kojima pleše Lana Hosni, nagrađena na prethodno spomenutoj dodjeli godišnjih
strukovnih udruga Nagradom za najperspektivnijeg plesnog umjetnika ili umjetnicu. Lana Hosni u objema predstavama odvažno i istančano iskušava polimorfne
osjetilnosti plesnoga tijela.
I završno, razgovoru s nacionalnom baletnom prvakinjom Edinom Pličanić,
koja je sublimno kreirala ulogu Ane Karenjine u praizvedbi istoimenog baleta u
koreografiji Lea Mujića, prethodi analiza te predstave. Autorica teksta, koja ne
dijeli uspjelu baletnu predstavu od suvremenih umjetničkih plesnih praksa, potpisnica je i ovih redova.
Iako plesače danas gotovo nitko ne razumijeva kao puke prenositelje ili utjelovitelje autorovih/koreografovih zamisli, jer su u suvremenoplesnim predstavama
stekli suradnički ili suautorski status u procesu stvaranja i izvođenja predstave, takvu
transformaciju plesačkih uloga nije usporedno pratilo i umnažanje njihova govornoga ili pisanog diskursa o plesnoj praksi. Stoga nam se činilo urgentnim otvoriti
prostor upravo plesačkim opservacijama, pamćenjima, refleksijama, osjetilnostima.
Zabilježiti ih in spe, kao predtekst za nova teorijska istraživanja ili pretpokret za
nove plesne radove.
Katja Šimunić
Movements 23 | 24 _ 5
editorial:
F
ocus of this double issue of Movements are dancers, their competence
and profession, their memories and opinions, their process of work and
reminiscences of choreographers they collaborated with, of choreographies
they danced and which have been interwoven in their corporealities. Our focus
is on sensitive dancers’ archives of fragile dance gestures and dance performances
which, by definition, appear in disappearance. Hubert Godard writes that “it is
disturbing to see to what extent history leaves us numerous traces in relation to
costume designers, musicians, choreographers, but it has remained completely
silent in relation to dancers and their work, their professional development,
bodily technique, in short, in relation to real foundations of dance” (Le geste et
sa perception / Gesture and Its Perception, 1998). Exactly because of that, we talk
with female and male dancers whose bodies are strongly engrossed into the
action of dancing corporeity, who contemplate movement on the Croatian dance
scene, and each of these conversations is preceded by another text about an
actual performance in which they dance in order to illustrate a creative context
in which they have been immersed recently. The current Croatian dance practice
is recognizable not merely on domicile performative venues, but also when guest
performances appear at festivals and our artists participate in residences in dance
institutions abroad, and more and more often in international co-production
networks. It has become a visible part of the European artistic dance scene, but
on the other hand history of the Croatian dance scene and theoretical reflection
about it are almost entirely unknown to European spectators/readers. So the
editorial board of Movements decided to continuously publish bilingually, in
Croatian and English, from this double issue on.
So far, we have also published Movements in English language at particular
intervals (2006, 2010) as well as one issue in French language (2011). Nevertheless, communication and more dynamic and frequent dialogue with international
spectators and readers by means of bilingual issue seems to us as necessity in
order to strengthen visibility and readability of the most propulsive realizations
of the Croatian dance practice and theory.
This double issue is opened with a text by the dance critic Iva Nerina Sibila
about the performance Move-r, choreographed by Aleksandra Janeva Imfeld. It
is introduction to the conversation with Branko Banković, a long term dancer of
the Studio - Contemporary Dance Company from Zagreb. In October this year,
Branko Banković received special recognitions for thirty years of dance work by
two professional organizations of contemporary dance, the Croatian Association
of Dance Artists and the Association of Professional Dance Artists Puls, and he
has still been courageously entering bold performative appearances and dance
investigations in the maturity of his dance parkour.
The dramaturge and drama writer Vedrana Klepica, in her text about the performance Sola, addresses a hybrid of dance theatre and performative act as a kind
of homage to Almodóvar’s film poetics. It was created as collaboration of the experienced dancer Zrinka Lukčec Kiko and theatre director Renata Carola Gatica. The
text is followed by the conversation with Zrinka Lukčec Kiko who explicates her,
as she alone calls it, physical intelligence at work at the junctions of her dance work.
The theatrologist Mira Muhoberac writes about an unobtrusive dancer and the
author of a refined introspective dance poetics, Ana-Marija Bogdanović, about her
6 _ Kretanja 23 | 24
editorial: solo titled In a Space Without. (in collaboration with the director Marina Petković
Liker). A comprehensive conversation with Ana-Marija Bogdanović reveals a profound personal story of a dancer and author, as well as it objectifies part of the
Croatian dance landscape from the 1980 to the present time.
The dance critic and dance historian Maja Đurinović talks with dancers Aleksandra Mišić and Ognjen Vučinić who transformed their growing up together
on stage into an auto-fictional choreographic work titled You and conveys their
intimate dance-choreographic process of work in this performance.
In a meticulous conversations, the dance critic and theoretician of dance
Ivana Slunjski confronts us with Silvia Marchig, an eloquent dancer and author
who lives and works dance non-compromisingly. The conversation is preceded
by a text about the solo As Long as We’re Together. This work is an untypical
form for the author, supported contextually by the theme of sore points and
the performative event Four-handedness - a Small Performative Conference which
is focused on a direct dialogue with the audience and joint search for the possibilities of individual and social healing.
The theatrologist Nataša Govedić writes about performances by Sonja Pregrad,
one of the most impressive contemporary Croatian dancers/performers/authors,
and she especially singles out the performance Identity MOVE. Project!, Rearranging (and) the self-arranged which Pregrad performed with the visual artists Nives
Sertić. Nataša Govedić writes about Sonja Pregrad as a dance artists interested in
body “which thinks its kinetics, its affective core and its ideological tensions”.
Dejan Košćak, an art historian, writes about the performance Body by Mirjana
Preiss, created as a solo for the dancer Ina Sladić. After her initial education
in classical ballet and by means of, for example, a collaboration with Marina
Abramović, Ina Sladić has formed an interesting personal performative and
authorial expression she uses at present time.
The dance critic Jelena Mihelčić compared Variations on Sensitive, choreographed by Marjana Krajač, with Denuded, choreographed by Bruno Isaković,
both having Lana Hosni as dancer. She was awarded with the Award for the most
perspective female or male dance artist at the previously mentioned ceremony of
annual awards by the professional associations. In both performances, Lana Hosni
explores polymorphic sensory qualities of a dance body boldly and delicately.
And conclusively, the conversation with the national prima ballerina Edina
Pličanić who subliminally created the role of Anna Karenina in the premiere of
the ballet of the same name, choreographed by Leo Mujić, is preceded by the
analysis of this performance. The author of the text, who does not separate a
successful ballet performance from contemporary artistic dance practices, is also
the author of these lines.
Although today dancers are principally not perceived as mere transmitters
or embodiments of author’s/choreographer’s ideas because, in contemporary
dance performances, they have acquired status of a collaborator or coauthor in
the process of creation and performing dance works, such a transformation of
dance roles has not been equally accompanied by multiplication of their spoken
or written discourse on dance practice. Therefore we thought it was urgent to
open up a space intended exactly for dancer’s observations, memories, reflections,
sensory impressions. To record them in spe, as a pretext for new theoretical
researches or a pre-movement for new dance works.
Katja Šimunić
English translation: Lidija Zoldoš
predstava: Pokret-ač
predstava: Pokret-ač < Pokret-ač, Foto: Iva Korenčić Čabo >
IVA NERINA SIBILA
Kako presložiti
pojmove
i preokrenuti
noć-dan u dan-noć
O predstavi Pokret-ač u koreografiji Aleksandre Janeve Imfeld i Studija za suvremeni ples
,,
E
stetički [koreografija] se okreće od uspostavljenih pojmova plesa vezanih za vještinu i umijeće,
uspostavljajući autonomne diskurse koji nadvladavaju probleme konceptualizacije, produkcije, izražajnosti
i reprezentacije. U isto vrijeme dobiva zamah na političkoj
razini s obzirom na to da se nalazi u središtu društva koje
je u velikoj mjeri organizirano oko pokreta, subjektiviteta i
nematerijalne razmjene.”1
Predstava Pokret-ač Aleksandre Janeve Imfeld2 kreirana za
plesače Studija za suvremeni ples i u suradnji s njima, premi-
jerno je izvedena na otvorenju 31. Tjedna suvremenog plesa
u svibnju 2014, a privukla je pozornost šireg kruga publike
kao dinamična, začudno duhovita, komunikativna i vizualno
atraktivna predstava.
Janeva Imfeld gradi Pokret-ača nekonvencionalnim, dozirano anarhističkim pristupom koreografiji i formatu izvedbe, autorskim ludizmom te za lokalne produkcijske uvjete
spektakularnom kostimskom ekstravagancijom kostimografa
Silvija Vujičića koja koketira s kičem i queerom. Intrigantan je
podatak da predstava sadržajno varira od večeri do večeri,
s obzirom na to da plesači tijekom izvedbe određuju koje
1
Iz najavnog teksta za konferenciju Choreography As Expanded Practice, Situation, Movement, Object, održanoj od 29. do 31.
ožujka 2012. u Barceloni u organizaciji Sveučilišta za ples i cirkus
Stockholm, Muzeja suvremene umjetnosti u Barceloni, Fondacije
Antoni Tàpies i plesnog centra Mercat de les Flors. Autor konferencijskog programa je Mårten Spångberg u suradnji s Bojanom Cvejić
i Xavierom Le Royom. https://choreographyasexpandedpractice.
wordpress.com.
2
Aleksandra Janeva Imfeld (1975) završila je Školu za ritmiku i
ples u Zagrebu. Studirala je ples na akademijama u Bruggeu i Lieru
u Belgiji te je 1998. bila stipendistica programa danceWEB na bečkom festivalu ImPulsTanz i skupine Jennifer Muller u New Yorku.
Poslijediplomski program Advanced Performance and Scenography
Study (a.pass) završava 2012. u Bruxellesu. U Hrvatskoj je plesala
u Studiju za suvremeni ples, Zagrebačkom plesnom ansamblu i
surađivala s Irmom Omerzo i skupinom BADco. Na međunarodnoj sceni surađivala je s brojnim koreografima kao što su Ismael
Ivo, Ana Mondini, Brice Leroux, David Hernandez te sa skupinom
Système Castafiore. Jedna je od inicijatorica Nomadske plesne
akademije, regionalne mreže koja je svojim programima u posljednjih deset godina povezala različite plesne i izvedbene umjetnike
balkanske regije te značajno utjecala na razvoje tih scena. Također
je suosnivačica Nomadske plesne akademije Hrvatska koja se bavi
decentralizacijom plesa.
će od mogućih scena izvesti i na koji način. Tako rasprave
gledatelja o toj predstavi često dovode do nesporazuma, s
obzirom na to da viđeno mutira, iako su razvoj i struktura
predstava zadani. Izvorno rađena metodom in situ u crnom
studiju Zagrebačkog plesnog centra, koristeći se zadanim
elementima prostora kao dramaturškim i koreografskim elementom, Pokret-ač nastavlja uspješnu seriju suradnji Studija
za suvremeni ples i nezavisnih domaćih koreografa.
Veza je Janeve Imfeld sa Studijem za suvremeni ples dugotrajna. Svoj profesionalni plesni put započinje u njihovu
pomlatku, da bi se u predstavi Stravinski i ja Matjaža Fariča
i Ona Ann Papoulis pojavila nakon školovanja u inozemstvu
i predstavila kao izvrsna plesačica. Pokret-ač je tako kontinuitet dugotrajna poznanstva i obostrana razumijevanja.
Jednako tako za Janevu Imfeld to je prva veća predstava
nakon 2žene2brata2metra, koja je realizirana u suradnji s
Istarskim narodnim kazalištem – Gradskim kazalištem Pula
2009. Time je Pokret-ač važna produkcija za prisutnost ove
autorice na domaćoj sceni i za njezin autorski kontinuitet. O
suradnji sa SSP-om autorica kaže:
„Ovdje se vidim kao moderator ili prometnik jedne situacije i presretna sam zbog posvećenosti cijelo vrijeme prisutne
u svakom čovjeku. Za mene je to bila utopijska situacija u
kojoj su konflikti bili dozvoljeni, prigrljeni i kao takvi kreirali
jako puno prostora za pozitivnu i kreativnu radnu situaciju.”3
Aleksandra Janeva Imfeld na hrvatskoj sceni posebna je
po svojem snažnom usmjerenju na spajanje inovativnih koreografsko-izvođačkih tendencija s jednako tako progresivnim
praksama društvene samoorganizacije i kolektivne suradnje.
U brojnim organizatorskim, razvojnim, istraživačkim, interdisciplinarnim, moderatorskim i edukativnim aktivnostima,
kao što su međunarodna mreža Nomad Dance Academy4
ili istraživačko-izvedbeni projekt Konektor5 , Janeva Imfeld
razrađuje svoju viziju kolektivnog, suradničkog modela autorstva i odlučivanja. To iskustvo jasno prenosi u autorski
rad, kao metodu, ali i kao sadržaj.
Diskurs koreografije kao proširene umjetničke i teorijske
prakse, u kojem možemo prepoznati interesno polje Janeve
Imfeld, sažima Ric Allsopp:
„(…) geopolitička i biopolitička pitanja postaju suštinski
koreografska: odlučiti tko je sposoban ili komu je dopušteno kretati se – i pod kojim uvjetima; odlučiti gdje je nekomu
dopušteno kretati se; definirati koja su tijela koja mogu birati
punu pokretljivost i koja su tijela prisiljena na izmještanje.
Krajnji je rezultat te politike mobilnosti transformacija pra-
va na slobodno i dostatno kretanje u privilegiju i obrtanje
te privilegije u visoko vrednovani subjektivitet. Pokret, kao
‚nezamjetljiv par excellence’ (kao što nas Deleuze i Guattari
neprekidno podsjećaju), tako će se uravnoteživati između
dvaju polova: Moći (pouvoir) i snage (pouissance), stavljajući
u odnos dva različita načina razumijevanja kako pokret može
biti politički i estetički aktiviran.”6
Uđemo li u srž rada Janeve Imfeld, u sam plesački habitus,
nailazimo na plesačko-improvizacijsku metodu koju razvija
i podučava na radionicama i u istraživačkim procesima, a
koju duhovito, a tajnovito naziva točkice. I tom metodom,
na razini duboke plesačke tjelesnosti, ustraje na pomaku, na
organizaciji tijela izvan plesačke logike, postavljajući neku
drugu plesnost. Točkice u plesački rad unose zadatak koncentracije kojim se kretanje usložnjava multiplikacijom pozornosti i njezinim transferom na zamišljene pokretne točke
u raznim dijelovima tijela. Metoda funkcionira kao alat kojim
će kretanje izbjeći uobičajenu organizaciju, emociju, ritam i
slijed, a time se presložiti na neočekivan i uvijek nov način.
Ta metoda upotrijebljena je i u Pokret-aču, dajući plesačima
ansambla koherenciju grupe bez fiksirane koreografije i svjež,
otkačen plesni pokret.
Metoda kreiranja predstave Janeve Imfeld spaja radionicu,
diskusijsku grupu i istraživačko-improvizacijsku sesiju. Odbacuje unaprijed pripremljenu temu ili autorski predumišljaj
i tretira dinamiku grupe, njihove odnose i komunikaciju u
plesnom studiju kao sadržaj i temu, metodama intenziviranja
i osvještavanja zajedništva i prisutnosti u trenutku. „Sve što
se dogodi od početka do kraja probe je IN”, objašnjava autorica, „sve postaje materijal i sadržaj, ništa ne ostaje OUT,
proba je veliko igralište.”7
Svaka proba tretira se kao izvedba, a važne se aktivnosti
arhiviraju bilježenjem na razne načine i ponovno posjećuju u
sljedećim izvedbama/probama. Time s postiže frikcija prošlog trenutaka s navalom sadašnjosti, što je tema prisutna
u finalnim inačicama: određene plesačke akcije vidljiva su
reminiscencija i reizvedba onih prošlih, dok se niz odluka
donosi u stvarnom vremenu, pred nama. Eksplozivan kolektivni potez, koji u predstavi povremeno doseže dadaističku
atmosferu, poziv je na preslagivanje pojmova i odnosa među
njima. A pitanje koje izranja iz tog rada je: kako se možemo
pokrenuti da to učinimo?
Prostor Pokret-ača organiziran je radno, djeluje pripremljeno za neformalno pokazivanje rada u nastajanju ili radionice. Gledališne su tribine uvučene, a dva reda stolica postav-
3
Andrea Remetin, Aleksandra Janeva: Prave ideje se mogu
realizirati bez obzira na financije, http://www.tportal.hr/kultura/
kulturmiks/334515/Aleksandra-Janeva-Prave-ideje-se-mogu-realizirati-bez-obzira-na-financije.html.
4
http://www.nomaddanceacademy.org/.
5
http://www.stuk.be/en/program/connector.
6
Ric Allsopp i André Lepecki, “Editorial: On Choreography”.
Performance Research: A Journal of the Performing Arts, On Choreography, vol. 13, broj 1, 2008. http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/
full/10.1080/13528160802465409#.Ve2lz31nFFs.
7
Iz privatne prepiske elektroničkom poštom s Aleksandrom
Janevom.
10 _ Kretanja 23 | 24
predstava: Pokret-ač Movements 23 | 24 _ 11
ljena u L-oblik širinom izvedbenog prostora. Rasvjeta djeluje
kao da je radna 8 , tonski i svjetlosni pult gotovo je uklopljen
u publiku. Vrata prema hodniku otvorena su, zakrčena kartonskim kutijama slijepljenim u veliki tepih 9 . Otvorena vrata
daju osjećaju propusnosti, nedovršenosti. Nešto je neobično
u odnosima veličina – tepih je prevelik u odnosu na vrata, broj
gledatelja premalen za broj izvođača. Organizacija prostora
poziva i one zakašnjele, u predstavu mogu zalutati i poneki
vježbači iz susjednog studija.
Plesači, njih čak osam (Ana Vnučec, Martina Tomić, Ana
Mrak, Dina Ekštajn, Matea Bilosnić, Bosiljka Vujović Mažuran,
Branko Banković, Bruno Isaković) lagano se kreću, u grupi,
no svaki za sebe. Pokret je suspregnut, polagan. Dominiraju
izolirani pokreti glave i kukova, gotovo nepomičnih ruku.
Djeluju prilično groteskno, nezgrapna bića koja tragaju za
smjerom, s povremeno naglašenim padovima i promjenama
mjesta. Odjeveni su ležerno, urbano, gotovo privatno, naglašavajući osobnosti.
S malog CD-playera čuje se obrada Sinnermana Nine
Simon10 . Izbor glazbe kao ulaz u predstavu sigurno nije slučajan, imajući na umu aktivistički angažman kontroverzne
dive soul-jazza i njezine nekonvencionalne nastupe u kojima
je kombinirala razne aspekte performativnosti. Glazba iako
tiha, euforična je, zarazna. Ključan motiv gotovo je mantrično
ponavljanje riječi power. Glazba pokreće, no plesači se opiru
tom pogonu, ostaju u polaganu, zaustavljenu tempu.
Plesačka se akcija isprva organizira u prepoznatljivim kodovima dječjih igara slijedi vođu i dan-noć, koja se ubrzava
do raspada i u kojoj se plesači očito zabavljaju. Tim zaigranim
ulazom u predstavu pojam koreografije spušten je ili razrahljen do dječje igre, do jednostavnih pravila koja organiziraju kinetiku grupe, ostavljajući svakom da reagira svojom
plesačkom intuicijom. Koreografija je tako nusproizvod igre
kojom se uspostavljaju dvije bitne teme Pokret-ača: kolektivno autorstvo i pitanje originalnosti. Autorski tim objašnjava:
„U ovoj se predstavi koreografkinja bavi propitivanjem
originalnosti, kopiranjem i vlasništvom nad idejama… Pokret-ači smatraju da je nemoguće ponoviti ikakvu akciju na
potpuno isti način, a kopiranje i mutaciju koriste za stvaranje
novih originala.”11
Kod igre, tako izravno postavljen na početku, odlučna je i
drska demistifikacija umjetničkog, odnosno koreografsko-redateljskog naslova, a nadalje i tvrdnja zasićenosti uvriježenim
koreografskim načinima koji mobiliziraju plesače unutar jedne
poetike i prenose interesno polje i iskustvo jednog autora.
8
Oblikovanje rasvjete: Aleksandar Čavlek.
9
Scenografija: Silvio Vujičić, Mladen Donadini i Pokretači.
10 Zvuk: Marin Živković.
11 http://www.plesnicentar.info/hr/
predstave/9-arhiva-predstava/705-pokret-ac.
12 _ Kretanja 23 | 24
Sljedeća akcija koju plesači kolektivno izvode lijepljenje je
selotejpa na tepih sastavljen od smeđih kartonskih kutija, koji
unose iz hodnika. Plesači su zaokupljeni tim besmislenim radom. Zvuk i ritam koje proizvodi odmatanje selotejpa postaje
zvučnom pratnjom akcije, koja trajanjem i intenziviranjem do
tjelesnog pretjerivanja počinje proizvoditi plesnu koreografiju.
Tako dolazimo do temelja strukture ove predstave koji je moguće
sažeti pitanjem: ako sve fizičke akcije kao što su rad, igra, ples,
utilitarne ili besmislene, autentične ili prenesene, tretiramo unutar izvedbe jednako, bez privilegiranja ijedne, principom dječje
naivnosti, koja će vrsta izvrtanja scenskih pojmova nastati?
Sljedeća se akcija odvija na tepihu koji prepoznajemo kao
svojevrsnu arhivu procesa, jer je ispunjen bilješkama i skicama.
Plesači izvode svojevrsni twister, tragajući za bilješkama i oslanjajući dijelove tijela na njih; tako grade koreografiju tog trenutka, uspostavljanjem logike odnosa unutar arhive procesa.
Usporedno se odvija duet Dine Ekštajn i Branka Bankovića,
kao prvi čin antikonsenzusa, odnosno akcije pojedinca protiv
grupe. U duetu je plesačica potpuno umrtvljena, beživotna,
prepuštena, dok ju plesač manipulira i nosi scenom, polako
gubeći strpljenje zbog njezine nesuradnje. Na kraju je ostavlja
na kartonima, tako i ona postaje dijelom arhive, prošlosti. Igra
se nastavlja čitanjem bilježaka s kartona, akciju predvodi Bruno
Isaković, s povremenim prijevodima na švedski ili ruski. Zašto
i koja je logika prevođenja, nije nam jasno, a kao i u twisteru,
kao i poslije u zajedničkim plesnim dijelovima, evidentno je
tematiziranje prevođenja i kopiranja. Što razumijemo, a što
ne, koji je tekst, onaj fizički ili govorni, pravi, a koji je imitacija?
Dvojezično tako pokretači nam dijele neke od tvrdnji zapisanih na arhivskom tepihu, koje vjerojatno svjedoče o brojnim
grupnim diskusijama. Odakle su pristigle u proces i čega su
dio, nagađamo: „tijela na prodaju” / „laž u nuždi potencira
istinu” / „dan života vredniji je od brda zlata” / „samodostatan pokret stvara hermetičan užitak” / „dostupnost stvara
milijun mogućnosti” / „i tu smo svi jednaki, tu u ZPC-u”…
Bruno Isaković preuzima izravnu komunikaciju s izvođačima i publikom, no govori pokretačkim jezikom izostavljajući
vokale. Postavlja pitanja o originalnosti izvedbe, komentira
pitanje moći institucija kao što su Zagrebački plesni centar
ili Hrvatsko narodno kazalište, koje gestom dvorske lude
simbolički poklanja izabranim članovima publike.
Akcija se dalje vraća na zajedničku plesnu igru, koja je
središnji dio predstave. Sadržaj tih segmenata varira od izvedbe do izvedbe, a zadaci na kojima plesači rade međusobno
su kopiranje pokreta, zamjena mjesta i mutiranje, odnosno
variranje sljedova pokreta. U jednoj izvedbi vidimo plesače
kako se organiziraju u unisone grupe, dok u drugoj rade na
temi skokova, uvijek se koristeći sličnim principima. Koje sve
mogućnosti postoje i koliko je mogućih varijanti Pokret-ača,
zapravo koliko bi izvedaba bilo potrebno da bi se vidio cijeli
dijapazon varijacija? Zanimljivo je i intrigantno da unatoč
predstava: Pokret-ač variranju koreografske građe dojam o predstavi ostaje isti,
odnosno unatoč razlici u dijelovima, njihov zbir daje istu cjelinu. U toj tvrdnji ponovno nalazimo oštricu kojom Aleksandra
Janeva Imfeld propituje koreografske tradicije, odnosno njezin
promišljeni autorski anarhizam.
Kao fiksna mjesta predstave nalazimo dojmljiv individualni iskaz Ane Mrak koji izvodi, potpuno neočekivano, na
općepoznatu Bachovu Air12 , snimljenu, očekivano za estetiku predstave, u zvučnoj distorziji. Plesačica koncentrirano,
uronjeno i zaplesano izvodi solo stisnutih šaka, u dubokim
čučnjevima, sa širokim prijenosima težine i padovima. Pokret
i zanos koji Air donosi proizvode za nju ostali pokretači, koji
ju voze po prostoru na kartonskom tepihu, tjerajući ju na
razvoj dinamike kako bi održala kontrolu i ravnotežu. I ta
scena, plesački standardno donesena, idejom letećeg tepiha
dobiva začudno ironičnu notu.
Već spomenuta individualka u zajednici jednakih, Dina
Ekštajn u svakoj izvedbi izvodi solo akciju prolazeći tik do
publike, šunjajući se i nježno šapućući. Taj prolaz varira kostimski i trenutkom unutar predstave, no uvijek traje dugo,
čak i izvan trajanja predstave, nakon pljeska.
Drugi dio predstave označen je dramatičnim prebacivanjem kartonskog tepiha na zlatnu stranu, uz dramatičnu
promjenu svjetla, što potpuno preobrati prostor, a tijekom
predstave plesači se presvlače u dojmljive kostime kojima
dominira zlatna, crvena i crna boja. U tom drugom i finalnom dijelu Pokret-ač radi na hiperteatralnosti, maksimalnoj
ironiji kazališne magije i potpunoj arbitrarnosti dramaturgije.
Plesači tako odjeveni poput likova iz raznih kazališnomodnih snoviđenja prolaze kroz publiku i okupljaju se u organizam koji se kreće usporeno, lagano i polako se raspada.
Koliko god kolektivna, ova predstava daje plesačima dovoljno prostora za izgradnju individualnog stava. Ana Vnučec
12
na zlatnom tepihu koji lebdi oko nje izvodi razlomljen, sapet
solo u kojem pomiče dio po dio tijela, stvarajući dojam futurističke distopije i represije tijela. Martina Tomić, fluidna
i meka pokreta, otvorenije je, zavodljive pojavnosti. Mlada
Matea Bilosnić razigrana je, odlučna i lucidna, dok se pokretačica + Bosiljka Vujović Mažuran pojavljuje u drukčijoj
ulozi, komunicirajući s publikom i tek povremeno ulazeći u
prostor plesa, otvarajući rubne međuzone predstave. Branko
Banković koncentrirane je, diskretne prisutnosti, detaljno razrađena pokreta, dok je Isaković na suprotnoj strani svojom
neobuzdanom eksplozivnom tjelesnošću i duhovitom ulogom
domaćina talk showa.
Potreba izlaženja izvan okvira plesnog žanra, ulazak u
domenu društvenoga i teorijskoga i stvaranje pomutnje unutar postojeće arhitekture vrijednosti, naglašena je i igrom
preimenovanja ključnih aktera u plesnoj produkciji: autor ili
koreograf postaje moderatorom ili pokretačem, a izvođači
pokretači. I publika, kao konstitutivni partner u izvedbenom
događaju, ovdje je pažljivo tretirana: gledatelji su pozivani na
probne izvedbe nazivane „izvedbama dana”, iznenađujuće
rano u odnosu na dogovoreni datum premijere, čime se odlučno eliminirala podjela na radni i finalni proizvod. Tijekom
izvedaba publika koja sjedi u ravnini s izvođačima čestom
komunikacijom s njima postaje otvorenim i raspoloženim
sugovornikom.
Igramo li dan-noć ili noć-dan? Je li prava strana pohabani
karton ili svjetlucavo zlato? Izvedba je istina ili mora funkcionirati kao travestija i laž? Organizirani kaos Studijeva Pokretača poziva na slalom kroz te zone, ostavljajući zamućenim
početak, kraj i pokušaj logična zaključka. Otvoreni i kristalno
jasni u ovom radu brojni su potencijali kolektivnog autorstva
i jednako tako brojni rizici koje ono donosi, a koje ovaj rad,
kao i sukobe i pogreške, jednostavno prigrljuje.
Suita za orkestar u D-duru, br. 3, II. stavak: Air. Op. ur.
razgovor: Branko Banković
razgovor: Branko Banković < Pokret-ač, Foto: Iva Korenčić Čabo >
IVA NERINA SIBILA
Neka nova
sloboda
Razgovor s
Brankom Bankovićem
B
ranko Banković plesač je impresivne biografije. Plesati je započeo u podmlatku Studija za suvremeni
ples (SSP), a od 1984. postaje stalnim članom tog
ansambla, u kojem pleše i danas. U trideset godina karijere
sudjeluje u gotovo svim produkcijama ansambla. Izdvojimo
samo neke: Kvartet ’78 Zagorke Živković, Brandenburg Gate
Desanke Virant, Metamorfoze, Rubato, Big iz bju;tiful, Kaputt, Žena koja puno priča, Maraton, Gyekenyes band i Na
putu prema gore Mirjane Preis, Tchi-Tchiao Kiline Cremone,
Stravinski i ja i Posvećenje proljeća Matjaža Fariča, Giselle
Adriaana Luteijna, Identitet dodira, ritam matematike Gregora Lušteka, Kazalište ljubavi Darija Harjačeka, Sale Ksenije
Zec, Duh (sklon promjeni) Maje Drobac, Povijest gledanja
Olivera Frljića, Large Sanje Tropp Frühwald, Projekt Surprised Body – Zagreb Francesca Scavette, Pokret-ač Aleksandre
Janeve Imfeld, Nečastive Brune Isakovića. Pleše i u dječjim
produkcijama SSP-a kao što su: Iz priče u priču, Čarobna
kreda, Vila lutaka Zagorke Živković i Desanke Virant, Tko
još vjeruje u rode?, Zar sam ja glup?, Ružno pače, Slavuj i
Čokolada Desanke Virant te Šeherezada Ksenije Zec.
Izvan matičnog ansambla pleše u produkcijama Zagrebačkog plesnog ansambla, llinkt! plesnog projekta, Baleta
Hrvatskog narodnog kazališta u Zagrebu, Plesnog centra
TALA, Tangram Dancea Kiline Cremone, Istarskog narodnog
kazališta – Gradskog kazališta Pula, Ekscene te u mnogim
dramskim predstavama u gotovo svim gradskim kazalištima.
Intenzivno radi kao plesni pedagog i koreograf u plesnim cen-
trima i grupama u Hrvatskoj, a na predmetu Scenska praksa
u Školi suvremenog plesa Ane Maletić prenio je SSP-ovu
produkciju Posvećenje proljeća koreografa Matjaža Fariča i
prilagodio ju za ansambl s dvadeset dvoje plesača završnih
razreda spomenute škole.
S redateljicom i dramaturginjom Dubravkom Zrnčić-Kulenović ostvaruje brojne predstave sa Studijem lutkarstva
Sarajevo, Sarajevskim ratnim teatrom, Narodnim pozorištem
Sarajevo te Dječjim kazalištem Ivana Brlić-Mažuranić iz Slavonskog Broda.
Dobitnik je Nagrade hrvatskog glumišta za najbolje ostvarenje u plesu u sezoni 2003/2004. za mušku ulogu u
predstavama Nešto, možda, sasvim osobno koreografkinje
Snježane Abramović Milković i Kaputt koreografkinje Mirjane
Preis, Nagrade za najbolji scenski pokret na Festivalu bosanskohercegovačke drame Zenica 2002. u koreodrami Odkamen
Sarajevskog ratnog teatra prema tekstu Maka Dizdara i u režiji
Dubravke Zrnčić-Kulenović, Nagrade za najbolju predstavu
u cjelini na Bugojanskom lutkarskom bijenalu 2011. za predstavu Djevojčica sa šibicama1 Studija lutkarstva Sarajevo i
Altteatra. Također, dobitnik je priznanja Grb grada Slavonskog
1
Scenarij i režija: Dubravka Zrnčić-Kulenović; korežija, scenski
pokret i izbor glazbe: Branko Banković; izvođačice: Alena DžeboHećo i Jasminka Požek-Božuta; likovna rješenja scene, kostimi,
video i grafičko oblikovanje: Naida Begović i Adisa Vatreš; lutke:
Ivanka Hristova-Radeva; produkcija: Slaven Vidak; tehničko vodstvo: Husein Mazrak.
Broda 2014. za dvadeset godina stručnog i stvaralačkog rada
s odgojno-obrazovnom komponentom, strpljivosti, trajnog
prijateljstva i moralne potpore djeci, učiteljima i djelatnicima
Kazališno-koncertne dvorane Ivana Brlić-Mažuranić. Od
2013. predsjednik je Udruge plesnih umjetnika Hrvatske.
¬ U ovom razgovoru zanima me baviti se odnosom plesača prema vlastitoj izvedbi. Htjela bih da prođemo tvoju
plesačku biografiju, utjecaje, formativne izvedbe i susrete,
time, kroz tvoju vizuru, doći do onoga što je to što čini plesački rad. Što se događa unutar trokuta tijelo – koreografija
– izvedba u raznim fazama plesačke karijere. Dakle, nakon
trideset godina na sceni, pretpostavljam da se tvoj odnos
prema sceni i prema sebi samom kao izvođaču mijenjao?
Kako iz današnje perspektive izgleda tvoj početak?
U pristupu plesu i radu na predstavi danas i u vrijeme kad
sam počeo raditi razlika je ogromna. Prva predstava u kojoj
sam nastupao bila je Crash – slučaj sestara N koreografkinje
Suzane Slive2 iz 1985. u produkciji Studija za suvremeni ples.
Prvo sam, kao početnik, morao dosegnuti određenu tehničku
razinu izvođenja. Tada se predstava radila drukčije, plesnu
građu dobili smo gotovu od koreografa, potom je slijedilo
uvježbavanje. Na to je išla vlastita interpretativna kvaliteta,
koju bi svaki plesač pronalazio sam ili u suradnji s koreografom, ali tek poslije, kad je koreografija uvježbana. Rijetko
smo stvarali zajedno s koreografom. Iznimka je Mirjana Preis3
koja je uvijek proces otvarala prema plesačima. U pravilu smo
dobivali gotovu građu koju smo morali reproducirati. To su
bile velike ansambl predstave sa zajedničkim scenama koje su
iziskivale dugotrajan grupni rad u dvorani. Imali smo mnogo
repriza, što je davalo mogućnost interpretativna razvoja svakom plesaču u predstavi. Žao mi je što danas mnoge predstave to nemaju. Prva predstava u kojoj je proces bio drukčiji,
govorim o radu unutar ansambla, bila je Tchi-Tchiao Kiline
Cremone4 . Ta predstava mi je u potpunosti okrenula svijet.
2
Suzana Sliva, plesačica i koreografkinja. Završila je Školu za ritmiku i ples u Zagrebu, bila je članicom Studija za suvremeni ples, u
kojem je plesala i koreografirala nekoliko cjelovečernjih predstava.
Osnovala je Ansambl apsolutnog pokreta 1998, a u Zagrebačkom
gradskom kazalištu Komedija gostujuća je koreografkinja.
3
O Mirjani Preis vidi fusnotu br. 2 u tekstu Dejana Košćaka
Svijest tijela i tjelesnost svijesti na str. 169.
4
Kilina Cremona (1947), francuska je plesačica, koreografkinja i pedagoginja. Školovala se u Parizu kod Karin Waehner i u
New Yorku u studiju Mercea Cunninghama, gdje poslije započinje
pedagošku karijeru. Osim u Cunninghamovoj skupini plesala je i
za Meredith Monk, Davida Gordona, Twylu Tharp i Violu Farber.
Nakon povratka u Francusku u Lyonu 1980. osniva skupinu Kiline
Cremone i Rogera Méguina, a potom i vlastitu skupinu Tangram
Dance. U Zagreb se seli 1995. Osniva plesni centar Athena u kojem
djeluje pedagoški i koreografski. U Zagrebu intenzivno podučava,
a potom nastavlja i u Splitu. Nakon povratka u Lyon, a vezano i
uz vlastiti gubitak sluha, 2002. osniva plesni centar Les Ateliers
16 _ Kretanja 23 | 24
¬ Vratimo se, molim te, na početak i na rad sa Suzanom
Slivom. Koliko si godina tada imao?
Imao sam šesnaest godina.
Kako si se našao u plesu?
Slučajno. Imam sestru blizanku koja je, tada smo živjeli
u Dugom Selu, išla na ritmiku k Branki Kolar koja je tamo
držala satove. Ona je tada plesala u SSP-u. Odlazio sam po
sestru nakon ritmike, a kad je došla zima, nisam ju više mogao čekati vani pa me Branka Kolar pozvala gore, i tako sam
probao. Prvo mi je bilo užasno neugodno, no u jednom smo
trenutku, a sjećam ga se kao da je bilo jučer, improvizirali na
temu Alice koja putuje svijetom. Branka Kolar provocirala
je u nama različite načine kretanja, pa sam se tako našao u
Africi i bio sam lovac i lovio panteru! Pohađao sam četvrti
razred osnovne škole i u tom trenutku otvorio mi se svijet
plesa, koji sam tako zavolio da sam još i danas tu. Imao sam
sreću da je taj tečaj vodila baš Branka Kolar, koja je radila
s ogromnim žarom, srcem, kreativnošću i u meni probudila
ljubav za ples. Nije nam bio problem organizirati autobus i
doći u Zagreb na predstave, a najdivnije je što sam počeo
živjeti za ples. Otad plešem, a školovanje, završio sam Školu
za primijenjenu umjetnost i dizajn.
¬ Jesi li možda razmišljao o likovnoj akademiji kao nastavku obrazovanja?
Jesam, no od toga sam odustao jer sam dobio poziv da
odem u Francusku, k Mathilde Monnier na ljetnu akademiju
u Montpellier. Išli smo Sanja Dević 5 i ja. Tijekom seminara
Mathilde Monnier pozvala nas je da se priključimo njezinoj
skupini, ponudila nam je ugovor na tri godine. No već smo
prije dogovorili da u SSP-u radimo predstavu Stravinski i ja
(1995) s Matjažom Faričem 6 . Tako smo se vratili u Zagreb.
¬ To je bilo u vrijeme dok je Kilina Cremona bila u
Zagrebu?
Da. Studio je pripremao predstavu za proslavu tridesete
godišnjice ansambla, a s obzirom na to da smo godinu prije na sedmom Tjednu suvremenog plesa vidjeli Symphonie
Solitude s kojom je Kilina Cremona pobijedila na natjecanju
Desmaé, u kojem radi s gluhim plesačima i plesačima oštećena sluha
i istražuje poveznice suvremenog plesa i znakovnog jezika.
5
Sanja Dević, bivša plesačica Studija za suvremeni ples, supruga
Branka Bankovića.
6
Matjaž Farič (1965), slovenski plesač, koreograf i redatelj,
jedna je od ključnih figura slovenskog suvremenog plesa. Školovao
se na Baletnoj školi u Mariboru, na Školi Palucca u Dresdenu, a
2010. završio je studij na Akademiji za gledališče, radio, film in
televizijo u Ljubljani. Ostvario je više od trideset pet plesnih predstava i dobitnik je brojnih međunarodnih priznanja. Umjetnički je
voditelj plesne skupine Flota i festivala Fronta suvremenoga plesa u
Murskoj Soboti.
razgovor: Branko Banković Koreografski susreti u Bagnoletu, kojom smo bili oduševljeni,
Mirna Žagar kao direktorica Tjedna suvremenog plesa i Zaga
Živković 7 pozvale su je na suradnju i godinu poslije premijerno smo izveli Tchi-Tchiao (1993). Meni su, a i drugima, ta
predstava i sam proces nastajanja potpuno promijenili pogled
na ples. Nakon premijere Kilina Cremona ponudila je Sanji i
meni da odemo u Montpellier.
¬
Kako je bilo raditi s Mathilde Monnier?
Ona je predivna! Nikad nismo znali koliko će njezin sat
trajati, jedan sat ili četiri sata. Sat je bio čist u linijama, tehnički
veoma zahtjevan, a drugi dio dana radila je na improvizaciji.
Fenomenalno nas je vodila u zadacima. Radili smo u jednoj
staroj crkvi, s vitrajima na prozorima, čarobno... U to je doba
pripremala Antigonu, htjela je da Sanja i ja uđemo u to, a ideja
joj je bila folklorne plesače iz malog afričkog mjesta spojiti s
plesačima suvremenog plesa i pronaći zajednički plesni jezik
predstave. Zaista intrigantno i provokativno za plesača.
¬ Je li ti žao da niste ostali u Francuskoj i iskoristili tu priliku? Sigurno bi vaši profesionalni životi izgledali drukčije?
U svojoj karijeri imao sam dvije prilike otići. Prva je bila ta,
a druga kad sam sa Zagrebačkim plesnim ansamblom radio
na Prepoznavanju krajolika (1996) u koprodukciji s barcelonskom skupinom Lanònima Imperial. Tada je njihov koreograf
Juan Carlos García meni i Ivančici Horvat ponudio angažman.
¬
Ivančica Horvat je otišla?
Da, ja nisam... iz privatnih razloga... (smijeh) U tom trenutku ne bih napustio Hrvatsku ni za što. I nije mi žao, ne.
Prihvatio sam prostor u kojem jesam, a moj privatni život, brak
i ta vrsta emotivne stabilnosti presudne su mi. Ne bih to žrtvovao. To je ipak nešto najljepše što mi se dogodilo u životu.
7
Zagorka Zaga Živković (1947), hrvatska plesačica, koreografkinja i pedagoginja. Školovala se u Školi za ritmiku i ples, koju je
završila 1965. u klasi Ane i Vere Maletić. Usavršavala se na ljetnim
akademijama u Kölnu i Rovinju, gdje se upoznala s plesnom tehnikom Graham, koju je poslije intenzivno podučavala i primjenjivala
u koreografijama. Od 1963. članica je Studija za suvremeni ples
kao jedna od najistaknutijih plesačica i koreografkinja (Musica
antiqua motio nova 1974, Concertino 1975, Kvartet ’78 1978, Espace
da la Solitude 1979, Kvartet ’79 1979, Sinfonietta 1983, Susret 1989).
Umjetnička je voditeljica ansambla od 1978. do 1997. Od 1972. do
1976. članica je i međunarodne grupe umjetnika Arte Viva (Italija),
kao plesačica i koreografkinja. Kao pedagoginja djelovala je u matičnom ansamblu i u Školi suvremenog plesa Ane Maletić (1990–1995)
te od 1990. kontinuirano u Međunarodnom kulturnom centru Hrvatske glazbene mladeži u Grožnjanu. Suradnica je za scenski pokret
i koreografiju u brojnim domaćim dramskim i lutkarskim predstavama, operetama (Zemlja smiješka, Orfej u podzemlju) i mjuziklima
(Kaj2O, Karolina Riječka). Aktivno je plesala do 1990. Kao plesačica
isticala se ekspresivnom interpretacijom i snažnom tehnikom, a
autorski se najčešće odlučivala za apstraktnu formu i koreografsku
interpretaciju klasične glazbe.
¬ U jako ranoj fazi, prije Kiline Cremone, kad si prelazio
iz Studijeva podmlatka u ansambl, možeš li se vratiti na
predstave i procese koji su bili bitni za tvoj razvoj, one koji
bi nazvao formativnima?
U to je vrijeme u Studiju bilo jedanaest plesačica i šest
plesača i nije bilo baš lako ući u predstavu. Imao sam sreću
da sam ušao u ansambl SSP-a, jer sam mogao svaki dan
ići na treninge, a uz to i tri puta tjedno na vježbe s podmlatkom. Godine 1986. ušao sam u Kvartet ’78 Zage Živković, što je bila iznimno plesna predstava u kojoj glazba
Antonína Dvořáka nije bila zvučna kulisa, nego nadahnuće
za ples, prenesena u pokret. Sjećam se koreografski iznimno
maštovitih grupnih scena i predivna dueta u drugom stavku koji su plesali Bosiljka Vujović-Mažuran i Darko Kolar.
Plesati uz uživo izvođenu glazbu Zagrebačkog kvarteta u
velikom ansamblu bilo je neprocjenjivo iskustvo za mene,
tada mladog plesača. Godinu poslije, 1987. imao sam sreću izvoditi predstavu Mirjane Preis Metamorfoze (1986),
nadahnutu Ovidijevim mitovima, s vrlo jakom autorskom
ekipom (dramaturg Krešimir Dolenčić, scenografkinja Dinka
Jeričević, kostimografkinja Ika Škomrlj). Bila je to predstava
s trinaestero plesača, jakim skupnim dijelovima, muškim
dionicama, duetima, izvedbeno i interpretativno zahtjevna.
Suzana Sliva potom me pozvala u Baladu o kralju (1988), u
kojoj prvi put dobivam solo dionice. Korepetitor predstave
bio je naš tadašnji baletni pedagog Guy Perkov, s kojim sam
mnogo radio da bih dobio tehničku sigurnost. Ta predstava
bila mi je izvedbeno zahtjevna, ali smo ju mnogo puta reprizirali i time sam prvi put radio i na razvoju uloge tijekom
duljeg izvođenja. Poslije su uslijedile Prolazna soba (1990)
i Rubato (1992) Mirjane Preis, predstave koje su nastajale
u vrlo bliskoj suradnji s plesačima, mnogo je građe izlazilo
iz improvizacijskih sesija, a tu se dogodila i divna plesačka
suradnja sa Sanjom Zimmer. Predstave su to koje je obilježila
i suradnja Mirjane Preis i redateljice i dramaturginje Nane
Šojlev, koja je te predstave prilagodila i snimila za Hrvatsku
televiziju. Rad na tim adaptacijama bio je jako zanimljiv, jer
su autorice mijenjale i prilagođavale scene za oko kamere,
što je davalo nova značenja, jer takve u scenskom prostoru
nisu bile izvedive. Tada se dogodio i plesni video Suzanin
dnevnik, kao koprodukcija SSP-a i Hrvatske televizije. To je
bio potpuno drukčiji rad na dobivanju izvedbene građe, koreografije mimike lica, mišića... Tada sam prvi put plesao duet
u zraku jer smo Sanja Zimmer i ja plesali na valcer Dubravka
Detonija viseći privezani na alpinističke konope!
¬ Vrijeme je to početaka Tjedna suvremenog plesa (TSP),
koji je pokrenut 1984. Program tog festivala doveo je važne međunarodne umjetnike u Zagreb. Veze nastale na tom
festivalu bile su iznimno važne za generaciju koja je tada
stasala, jer je ostalih informacija o plesu bilo malo. Do
snimaka se teško dolazilo, a internet još nije bio dostupan.
Kakva je tvoja veza s tim festivalom? Sjećaš li se nekih od
predstava s prvih TSP-ova koje su ti važne?
Da, danas je teško zamislivo da su informacije nedostupne, a komunikacije s inozemstvom spore! Preko
Tjedna došli smo do Kiline Cremone, a nakon naše premijere ona je odlučila ostati u Zagrebu. Njezin pedagoški
rad ostavio je veliki trag na našoj sceni. Festival nam je
tada bio prozor na međunarodnu scenu. Od predstava na
prvim Tjednima meni najvažnija bila je Im Bade wannen
Susanne Linke, na četvrtom TSP-u 1987, koju i danas
nosim u podsvijesti. Nakon te predstave nisam mogao
spavati... Doživljaj je bio toliko snažan. Onda gostovanje
Trishe Brown na sedmom TSP-u, njezina me predstava
odvukla daleko 8 … Izvedbeno me oduševilo Nizozemsko
plesno kazalište (NDT) koje je gostovalo godinu poslije 9 ,
tjelesnošću plesača u prvom redu, a predstave me nisu do
te mjere oduševljavale, bavile su se izvanjskim – izgledom
i oblikom pokreta. Iz današnje perspektive najvažniji je
utjecaj Susanne Linke.
¬ Sjećam se vrlo dobro te izvedbe. Dosta nas bilo je potpuno omamljeno njezinom snagom i poezijom. Nakon predstave održala je i radionicu u sklopu TSP-a, sjećam se da je
bila u dvorani Lada…
Da, bio sam tamo! Naravno! Svi smo bili tamo! Postoji
i anegdota vezana za moju fascinaciju tom predstavom:
tada sam bio u mlađoj generaciji plesača SSP-a, a bilo je
šest muških plesača, i bio sam zapravo usamljen u tom
oduševljenju. Njima ta predstava nije značila ono što je
meni, a kako sam stalno govorio o tome, tako su se muški
kolege beskrajno šalili na moj račun i zvali su me vodoinstalater. (smijeh)
¬ Studio je mnogo putovao. Možeš li locirati za tebe važne
susrete i predstave s tih putovanja? Utjecaje i veze koji su
te na neki način promijenili?
Sa Studijem sam stvarno mnogo gostovao! Sjećam se
da smo 1987. pripremali otvorenje Univerzijade kad je stigla
vijest o velikoj turneji u tadašnji SSSR i Poljsku. Gostovali
smo u šest gradova (Moskva, Riga, Pärnu, Varšava, Katowice i Wrocław) s pet predstava10 . To nisu bila gostovanja na
festivalima, nego u kazališnim kućama. Turneja je bila duga
i naporna, ali iznimno uspješna. Ekipa od dvadeset dvoje
8
Izvedene su tri koreografije Trishe Brown: Lateral Pass (1985),
Astral Convertible (1989), Opal Loop (1980).
9
Izvedene su koreografije Un Ballo i Stoolgame Jiříja Kyliána,
Jardí Tancat Nacha Duata i Passomezzo Ohada Naharina.
10 Kvartet ’78 Zage Živković, Preludij za poslijepodne jednog fauna i
Metamorfoze Mirjane Preis, Harlekin Desanke Virant, Pavana Darka
Kolara.
18 _ Kretanja 23 | 24
plesača i tehničara, iz aviona u kazalište, pa u hotel, pa opet
avion... U Wrocławu smo dva puta na bis plesali zadnji stavak
iz Kvarteta ’78, prvi put sam doživio ovacije cijelog kazališta,
svi su bili na nogama...
U sjećanju mi je ostao Seul 1988. Kad smo sletjeli na
aerodrom i kad su se otvorila pokretna vrata, čekalo nas
je tridesetak televizijskih ekipa, a mi uopće toga nismo bili
svjesni! Išli smo s trima predstavama: Kvartetom ’78, Metamorfozama i Baladom o kralju. Tada smo imali priliku vidjeti cijeli festival, a poprilično je bila zastupljena američka
scena. Osobito me oduševila plesačica Janne Bersciani koja
je obnavljala plesove Isadore Duncan. Oduševila me svojim razmišljanjem o slobodi kretanja i tijela. U to su doba
Studijeve predstave koketirale s naglašenom izražajnošću,
a veliki je akcent bio na izvedbenoj tehnici. To su bile kasne 1980-e, manje se bavilo eksperimentom i traganjem za
novim slobodama kretanja, što je bilo u žarištu ranih generacija Studija. O tome su mi mnogo govorili stariji članovi i,
naravno, imao sam spoznaja o tome putem videosnimaka.
Janne Bersciani fascinirala me svojim razmišljanjem o slobodi
tijela, o tome koliko tijelo mora biti slobodno da bi nešto
reklo. Naravno da moramo proći određeno školovanje našeg
instrumenta, no nakon toga tijelo treba staviti izvan okvira,
a kad krene oslobađanje, važno je da umjetnik bude zreo i
zna u što ga osloboditi. U suprotnom se plesač može veoma
lako izgubiti...
¬ Zapravo govoriš o disciplini temeljne edukacije, a potom
o putu prema vlastitoj umjetničkoj praksi i osobnosti, koji
često zahtijeva suprotstavljanje naučenom, neko od-školovanje. No ti nemaš formalno plesačko školovanje. Educirao
si se radeći u ansamblu i na seminarima. Kako sad gledaš na
to? Nedostaje li ti diploma neke institucije na tvom umjetničkom i profesionalnom putu?
Bilo bi mi lakše s diplomom jer naš sustav ne podupire
neformalno obrazovanje, a izrazito me zanima plesna pedagogija i htio bih predavati na našim plesnim institucijama.
S druge strane, imao sam slobodu da tijekom formiranja u
plesača sam odlučujem što će biti dobro za mene u tom trenutku. Mnoga znanja stekao sam radeći na predstavama,
što smatram neprocjenjivim. Danas vidim mlade koji dolaze
s akademija, zaista mnogo znaju i odlični su, ali slično razmišljaju. Vidim grupacije, generacijske i stilske. Zaista rijetko
vidim slobodu u mišljenju. Vjerojatno zato i tako dugo volim
i pristajem biti u Studiju, jer su predstave koje radimo potpuno različite.
Obrazovao sam se u Studiju, svakodnevno trenirajući
i radeći na predstavama s domaćim i inozemnim autorima
te na seminarima u ansamblu i izvan njega. Plesao sam u
predstavama autora i s plesačima koji su bili među prvim
generacijama ansambla, što je važno za razumijevanje na-
razgovor: Branko Banković šeg konteksta. Tada smo vježbali klasični balet koji su vodili Silva Muradori i Guy Perkov, tehniku Graham vodila je
Zaga Živković, kombinaciju modernih i jazz dance tehnika
Branka Kolar, Mirjana Preis i Desanka Virant, a Darko Kolar
jazz dance. Stalno smo išli na seminare. Nakon toga najviše
sam sustavno dobio od Kiline Cremone, koja mi je potpuno
promijenila doživljaj tijela kao instrumenta. Zbog toga sam
joj beskrajno zahvalan. Ne samo meni nego cijeloj generaciji
dogodilo se neko oslobađanje.
¬ U Studiju se tada dogodila i smjena generacija, nadovezujući se na promjenu načina rada i tempa svakodnevnih
treninga i proba.
Da, Bosiljka Vujović-Mažuran preuzela je umjetničko
vodstvo 1998. godine, promijenila je način rada i umjetnički je mijenjala repertoar. Nakon rada s Kilinom Cremonom
ansambl su napustili Desanka Virant, Ante Jurić, Drago Asić
Lika, Andrija Laboš Jerry, Suzana Sliva, Sanja Zimmer, koja
je bila sjajna izvođačica. Srednjoj generaciji, u kojoj smo bili
Sanja Dević, Ana Šaškor Jurić, Bojan Valentić, Marinko Čorak i ja, pridružili su se i mnogi mlađi plesači kao Tamara
Curić, Larisa Navojec, Aleksandra Janeva Imfeld, Ivančica
Horvat... Tada se postavljala predstava Ona u koreografiji
Ann Papoulis, vrlo zanimljiva predstava, eksperiment glasa
i tijela, koja je predstavila novu postavu ansambla. Sjećam
se da je Branko Magdić napisao fenomenalnu kritiku. Ann
Papoulis je i odlična pedagoginja tehnike Cunningham te smo
sve vrijeme tijekom procesa imali i satove s njom. Moram
reći da je Bosiljka Vujović-Mažuran kao voditeljica ansambla
uvijek davala mogućnost Studijevim plesačima da surađuju s
drugim ansamblima i koreografima, ne doživljavajući to kao
konkurenciju, nego kao umjetničku nadogradnju članova i
otvaranju prema sceni i suradnji.
¬
Tada je uslijedio Stravinski i ja Matjaža Fariča.
To je bilo u prijelaznom periodu vođenja ansambla, kad je
Bosiljka Vujović-Mažuran naslijedila Zagu Živković, potpuno
drukčiji rad. Radili smo u koprodukciji s Tjednom suvremenog
plesa i Zagrebačkim kazalištem mladih.
¬ Sjećam se te predstave, bila je zaista izvrsna. Znači,
nakon Kiline Cremone drugo prijelomno ime bio je Farič?
U Studiju je postavio dvije predstave, Stravinski i ja i
Posvećenje proljeća (2004). Obje su bile tehnički, odnosno
tjelesno i interpretativno iznimno zahtjevne. Bila je potrebna
velika izvođačka spremnost za takav rad. Kao ansambl morali
smo mnogo raditi da bismo mogli održavati razinu izvedbe
u kontinuitetu. Prije izvedbe bila su potrebna najmanje dva
tjedna proba da bismo se tjelesno pripremili do te mjere da
predstava bude to što je izvorno bila pred publikom. Predstavu smo mnogo izvodili i gostovali s njom.
¬ Jedna je od tvojih motivacija, znači, fizička zahtjevnost
koreografije?
Apsolutno da! U toj predstavi bilo je važno da, osim osobnih interpretacija, cijeli ansambl u predstavi ide do krajnjih
granica, ali da to čini svjesno. Probe su trajale zaista dugo,
sve dok svi mi kao ansambl nismo osjetili koje su to granice
do kojih treba doći. Glazba je bila iznimno snažna, trebalo je
vremena da se nađe podjednaki odnos u pokretu. U predstavi
je još glumio i Vilim Matula, a osim glazbe Stravinskoga u
predstavi je i glazba heavy metal sastava Killing Joke. Zadnja je scena bila najteža: nakon skoro jednog sata plesanja
ulazimo u scenu koja je u još jačem tempu. Prvi put mi se
dogodilo da sam zaista prešao prag tijela, boli i umora, da
samo ušao u taj prostor u kojem zaista možeš sve.
¬
To je najzahtjevnija predstava koju si izvodio?
Da. Poslije je bilo zahtjevnih i teških predstava, ali je u
njima bilo prostora za udah. Ovo je bilo sat vremena bez
stanke u furioznom tempu.
¬
A Posvećenje proljeća?
Farič se u tom radu bavio isključivo energijom cijele scene
i to je gradio na našim improvizacijama. Neke velike plesačke
individualnosti nije bilo, ali smo se kao ansambl jako povezali
i uspjeli smo dizati i spuštati energiju i zaokretati prostor kao
što su koreografija i glazba nalagale. Posvećenje mi je plesački bila zaista zanimljiva predstava: kako nas je bilo desetero
u ansamblu, uvijek bi netko došao na izvedbu s drukčijom
energijom nego inače. Tada je trebalo pogoditi frekvenciju
na kojoj ćemo se naći zajedno. To je zanimljivo. I sve se to
događa tijekom izvedbe. Danas su predstave drukčije, takav
pristup rijetko se vidi na sceni.
¬ Nedavno si se vratio toj koreografiji s učenicima Škole
suvremenog plesa Ane Maletić?
Da, moram spomenuti i veliku pomoć Dine Ekštajn, koja
je također plesala u premijernoj postavi. Vratio sam se tim
energijama, a najzahtjevnije mi je bilo kao osobi koja ne
izvodi objasniti plesačima, odnosno približiti im, a bilo ih
je dvadeset dvoje, što znači zajednički, kao ansambl podići
izvedbenu energiju. Htio sam postići to da mogu modulirati
energiju i dinamiku, onako kako to izvođač treba u takvom
tipu predstave.
¬ Možeš li to malo objasniti? Govoriš o nekoj zajedničkoj
frekvenciji, rezonanciji?
Prvotna ideja suradnje SSP-a i Škole odnosila se samo na
fragmente predstave, no uvidjevši plesačke mogućnosti učenika te njihov neizmjerni energijski potencijal i želju, odlučio sam
se za cjelovitu izvedbu, vjerujući da će mladi plesači u tome
i uspjeti. Želja mi je bila da ih provedem procesom stvaranja
predstave i koreografije i u tom smislu prilagodio sam libreto i
postojeću koreografiju za dvostruko veći broj plesača. Usprkos
tome što je dio koreografske građe bio zadan, postavio sam
plesačima zadatke improvizacijskog tipa. Sva sola, dueti i trija
nastali su improvizacijskim radovima učenika, dajući im na
taj način blisku plesnu građu i snažnu povezanost s djelom.
Zanimljivo je i nastojanje da se tijekom izvedbe zadrži stilska
čistoća uvjetovana upotrebom snažne energije bez ulaženja
u ekspresionističku izražajnost. Za učenike je dodatan zahtjev
bila kondicijska strana izvedbe predstave, na čemu se mnogo
radilo. Precizno i odgovorno doziranje energije bilo je veoma
važno da bi se predstava mogla izvesti bez energijskih padova, a u dinamičkom smislu izvesti do samog kraja. Upotreba
snažnog glazbenog predloška koji vrvi kontrastima, motivima
koji vode prema iščekivanju, dovelo je do jačanja izražajnih
mogućnosti plesača, osobito u situacijama naglih prijelaza,
promjena metrike i nepredvidive akcentiranosti.
¬ Možeš li sad, nastavljajući se na ta sjećanja, na neki
način definirati svoju ulogu u plesačkom ansamblu, kao
izvođač, kao plesač? Naime, s obzirom na to da si toliko
dugo u velikoj grupi i da si od 1998. producent ansambla,
očito se dobro osjećaš kao dio grupe, plesačkog organizma.
Unutar izvedbene ansambl situacije, kako se sagledavaš?
Odgovor je na tragu onoga što smo govorili o Posvećenju. Unutar ansambla živi mnogo energija zajedno. Studio
rijetko kad ima slične ljude, bilo po estetskom principu u
plesu, bilo tjelesnom. Veoma smo različiti. Tako da se faze
ansambla razlikuju. Kojiput osjetim potrebu da se povučem,
kojiput da trebam preuzeti, ali nema svjesnih odluka. To se
događa intuitivno. I nije me takav način funkcioniranja u grupi
dosad razočarao. Bosiljka Vujović-Mažuran kao umjetnička
voditeljica uvijek otvara prostor povjerenja, i umjetničkog i
ljudskog, i u tom prostoru ne možeš se ne osjećati dobro.
Naravno da je tu i velika količina odgovornosti spram produkcije, realizacije, prodaje...
¬ Ipak, u jednom si trenutku prestao s plesom, odustao.
Bilo ti je dosta svega?
Jesam, neko vrijeme sam se potpuno maknuo iz plesa.
Bilo je to od listopada 1999. do rujna 2001.
¬
To je bilo poslije rata… Jesi li bio u vojsci?
Da, sve sam prošao, ratište… U jednom nam je trenutku
puknuo film, financijska situacija bila je iznimno teška, i Sanja
i ja povukli smo se iz plesa i otvorili trgovinu. I nakon dvije
godine došao sam kući i rekao da idem na trening. (smijeh)
¬
Što ste prodavali?
Dječju konfekciju. I dobro nam je išlo, jako dobro! Planirali smo otvoriti još dva dućana. (smijeh) Onda je jedan dan
20 _ Kretanja 23 | 24
došla porezna kontrola i inspektorica me ispitivala nešto o
poslovanju, nisam imao pojma o čemu je riječ. Tada me prepoznala iz neke predstave i razgovarali smo o plesu i u meni
je sijevnulo pitanje kao grom: „Branko, pa što ti to radiš?”
Nešto se u meni prelomilo i vratio sam se plesu.
¬
Što sad Sanja radi?
Sanja je u prijevremenoj mirovini, zbog teške povrede
kralješnice koju je zaradila baš na Stravinskome. Poslije je još
radila s Ann Papoulis i nakon toga je stala. Nije više mogla.
Bavila se dugo pedagogijom. Sad se bavi kreativnim radom,
oslikavanjem, a to je i meni i njoj velika radost.
¬
Baš slikanje?
Za mene je to zapravo keramika. Maturirao sam na dizajnu keramike na Školi za primijenjenu umjetnost i dizajn.
U svom završnom radu spojio sam ples i keramiku; to je bilo
sedam ogromnih vaza, tanjura i rasvjetnih tijela oslikanih
plesnim motivima, svaki nadahnut drukčijim povijesnim periodom i stilom.
¬
Nakon dućana tako si se vratio u ples…
Vratio sam se u situaciju koja je bila potpuno drukčija.
Prva predstava Žurba duše Emilija Gutiérreza odvukla me u
Zagrebački plesni ansambl. Potom sam se vratio u Studio
raditi Giselle Adriaana Luteijna. I tako je krenulo dalje.
¬ U vrijeme prije stanke, točnije 1996. radio si i s Juanom
Carlosom Garcíjom u koprodukciji Zagrebačkog plesnog
ansambla i Lanònime Imperiala. Za generaciju koja je tada
radila i za dalji smjer tog ansambla taj rad i utjecaj čine mi
se prijelomnima. Kakvo je za tebe bilo to iskustvo?
Bilo mi je važno, Garcíjin pokret bio je jako lijep i zanimljivo ga je raditi, slobodan je i plesan. U predstavama je pak
često koketirao s dopadljivim. Pokret u kontekstu kakav je
gradio nije dobio funkciju koju je, mislim, trebao. No taj rad
donio mi je veliku kvalitetu plesnosti i mekoće. Predstavu
smo mnogo plesali i dosta gostovali tako da nam je svima
dala mogućnost razvoja. Uz članove ZPA-a i nas vanjske tu
je bila i međunarodna ekipa plesača, jako dobra energija i na
probama i na izvedbama.
Sljedeća takva promjena i ogromna borba za novi pristup tijelu i plesu dogodila mi se kad smo sa Studijem bili na
rezidenciji u Švedskoj pripremajući Projekt Surprised Body
Francesca Scavette. Probe su bile od deset ujutro do pola
osam navečer, s jednim satom stanke. Mladi kolege iz Studija
izdržavali su bez problema. Ja sam imao ogromnu krizu i stalno sam se pitao hoću li ostati u predstavi ili sjesti na sljedeći
avion i otići doma, u Zagreb. Kad si u četrdeset šestoj godini,
tijelo ima neku povijest kretanja, kilometražu, i kad svaki dan
dolaziš na probu, tražiš, i svaki dan ne možeš i ne prepozna-
razgovor: Branko Banković razgovor: Branko Banković
ješ, lupaš o zid, to je strašno. Da bih u jednom trenutku, u
nekom kasnom noćnom razgovoru s Gree Kipperberg, koja je
plesala s nama u predstavi, a koja je moja vršnjakinja, došao
do nekih zaključaka i shvatio da to sam sebi ne dopuštam.
S godinama kao da si na podsvjesnoj razini staviš okove koji
ti ne daju dalje i ne dopuštaju promjene. I tako iz probe u
probu uspio sam naći u sebi snagu, neku novu slobodu i to
njegovo kretanje. Na kraju sam volio i uživao plesati te predstave. Scavettin način kretanja zaista je superioran, divan, a
veliku pomoć i potporu u tim krizama pružili su mi kolege iz
ansambla, što je velika stvar.
¬ Kad si to već spomenuo, hajdemo još razgovarati o starenju na sceni. Ti si i dalje u iznimnoj formi, no vidi se jedna
drukčija prisutnost nego u mlađih plesača. Što te goni da si
dalje na sceni? I kamo dalje? Što još nisi napravio, a što bi
želio? Čini mi se da nam na sceni nedostaje zrelih izvođača,
koji otvaraju tu neku drugu izvedbenost.
Još imam strast za treniranjem i predstavama, imam
veliku sreću da u Studiju mogu održavati tijelo redovito,
što je jako važno. Genetski nisam sklon povredama, što je
također bitno. Kad radim s mlađim kolegama, jasan mi je
njihov drukčiji pristup. Mladi ljudi, to je normalno, imaju
potrebu dokazivanja, i to je prisutno na svakoj probi i na
svakoj izvedbi. Nose veliku količinu strasti i energije. U Murskoj Soboti sam 2014. na festivalu Fronta suvremenog plesa
gledao predstavu Delta Victor kolektiva La Intrusa Danza u
izvedbi Virginije Garcíje i Damiána Muñoza. Oboje su stariji
od pedeset. Plesali su u parku, a taj su prostor oplemenili
svojom zrelom izvedbenošću i točnim i jasnim načinom komunikacije s publikom. Taj rad donekle mi je odgovorio na
tvoje pitanje i potvrdio mi je zašto sam još u toj pustolovini.
Iako, iskreno, rijetko koji koreograf zna što s plesačima u
zrelim godinama na sceni, a čini mi se da u Zagrebu vlada i
predrasuda o vremešnim plesačima.
Danas je problem zapravo da imamo previše koreografa,
jer sustav financiranja usmjerava plesače u tu kategoriju. Tako
imamo jednu, možda će to zvučati jako grubo, devalvaciju
naslova koreografa. Kad sam počinjao, koreograf nije bio
svatko, to je bio netko s idejom, kojem se vjeruje, kojem se,
kad dođe pred tebe, daš toj ideji dušom i tijelom.
¬ Mislim da ne bismo trebali biti nostalgični, drugo vrijeme nosi druge vrijednosti…
Naravno, koreograf je danas ravnopravan s plesačima, što
je s jedne strane dobro. Takav pristup donosi demokratičnost,
drukčiju vrstu razmjene, i to je dobra provokacija plesačima.
No time se gubi autorska jačina, koju rijetko tko danas ima.
Mnogi se bave istraživanjima, što bi trebalo rezultirati novim
jezikom te ideje, no to u većini preraste u prezentacije i radove
u nastajanju, a nemamo gotovu ideju – predstavu. Zapravo
22 _ Kretanja 23 | 24
nam je danas teško naći koreografa koji bi se upustio i znao
raditi s većom grupom.
Da se vratim na međugeneracijsku suradnju: u Studiju
imam sreće da radimo takve projekte u kojima sa svojim godinama mogu surađivati i biti na sceni s mlađim kolegama.
Tjelesno se sigurno ne mogu uspoređivati s, recimo, Brunom
Isakovićem ili Anom Vnučec koji su sad nadmoćniji, brži, snažniji, ali zajedno možemo ući u prostor prožimanja i kreacije.
¬ S Brunom Isakovićem, plesačem koji od 2012. djeluje
u Studiju, napravili ste zahtjevan projekt – Nečastive. To
je treća verzija tog njegova rada, koji je počeo kao njegov
vlastiti solo, a potom se razvijao u solo za Anu Vnučec,
plesačicu Studija, pa u duete i sad s velikim ansamblom.
Riječ je o radu koji izvodite nagi u potpunoj tišini. Je li to
prvi put da si ogoljen na sceni?
Ne, treći! Prvi put na plakatu za Posvećenje proljeća,
potom sam radio s Ekscenom Undertone Sidneyja Leonija.
Pristao sam raditi projekt s Isakovićem jer mislim da ta ideja
i metodologija imaju umjetnički kredibilitet za razvoj.
¬ Gledajući probe i predstavu, čini mi se da je veoma zahtjevan rad izvođački. Velika i osobita koncentracija, tišina,
usporeno vrijeme, velika pozornost na velikoj grupi.
Rad na toj predstavi podsjetio me na predstavu koju sam
volio izvoditi, to je Kazalište ljubavi u režiji Darija Harjačeka, predstava trajanja i tišina, simbola, zaustavljena pokreta
i pogleda. Nadahnuće za tu predstavu zbirka je grafika iz
razdoblja baroka Théâtre d’amour, alegorija na temu ljubavi
i erotike koja me veže uz Nečastive. Predstava Nečastive u
svakom izvođaču otvara vezu s gledateljem, golo tijelo boji
tu vezu osobnim, disanje daje dinamiku pokreta s trajanjima
u inicijaciji kretanja. Dah uvjetuje slobodu ili zarobljava pokret, a tišine daju gustoću izvedbenom prostoru. Interakcije
s drugim tijelima, dahovima, pogledima, doticajima koncentracijski izvođaču daju novi input koji prenosi. Izvedbeno je
veoma teška predstava, delikatna, alati koje je dao koreograf
otvorili su prostor svakom izvođaču za kreaciju. Kako je u
ansamblu jedanaestero izvođača, tako se sve gore navedene komponente multipliciraju. Kontakt svih nas izvođača
s gledateljima, način prijenosa predstave njima i otvaranje
komunikacije stvara energiju predstave. Izvodeći ju, dosad
je uvijek bila drukčija.
¬ Od svih predstava koje si dosad vidio, a nisi u njima
izvodio, koja je to koju bi zaista, ali zaista volio otplesati?
Kao što sam rekao, to je solo Susanne Linke…
¬
Ženski solo?
Pa da! Zašto se uopće ograničavati? I da sam mogao…
to bi bila jedna od predstava… da razmislim koja točno…
razgovor: Branko Banković ¬
Je li to, možda, Pina Bausch?
Da. Zapravo bilo koja predstava Pine Bausch.
¬
Znači jaka emocionalnost, teatralnost…
Da.
¬
Znaš li koliko si predstava izveo dosad?
Premijernih plesnih, mislim, sedamdeset tri. S mjuziklima
i dramskim predstavama sto deset.
¬ Da je svaka imala petnaest izvedaba, a imala je i više,
to bi bilo oko tisuću petsto izlazaka pred publiku?
Ne znam. Zaista. Vjerujem da je više…
¬
Imaš li tremu?
Znaš što je zanimljivo? Da, imam. To više nije ona izvođačka trema otprije. Nego to je neki ushit u tijelu koji osjećam
i bilo bi mi žao da ga više nema. Neka strast prema svemu.
Stalo mi je kako će predstava proći, kako ćemo ju izvesti, hoće
li biti puno gledalište. Ne zato što sam i producent pa je to
moja odgovornost, nego zato jer je to bitno, jer ako nama
nije bitno, onda neće biti nikomu. Mi smo sami odgovorni
za svoju umjetnost. Ako olako puštamo da se predstave prikazuju na neadekvatan način… ma može biti slabo financijski producirana, ali ne može biti bez ljudskog i umjetničkog
angažmana, bez drivea. Onda ne treba ni raditi predstavu.
¬ Na kraju ovog razgovora, misliš li da si dosad kao izvođač bio u mogućnosti dati sve što možeš? Jesi li imao šanse
ići do kraja?
Napravio sam zaista mnogo projekata, a još ima prostora u meni koji mi se čini neistraženim. Kad tog osjećaja ne
bude, sigurno ću se prestati baviti plesom. Žao mi je da dosad nisam imao prilike razvijati vlastiti autorski rad. Mnogo
sam koreografirao u dramskim predstavama, ali u ansamblu
nisam. Nadam se da ću imati prilike i za to.
Iva Nerina Sibila plesna je umjetnica, edukatorica i kritičarka. Članica je uredništva časopisa za plesnu umjetnost
Kretanja, stalna kritičarka internetske stranice Plesnascena.
hr, a tekstovi su joj objavljivani u brojnim publikacijama u Hrvatskoj i inozemstvu. U brojnim projektima radi na dostupnosti i vidljivosti plesnih sadržaja, istraživanju emancipacijskih
potencijala plesne edukacije te pozicioniranju plesa u širem
društvenom kontekstu. Osnivačica je i voditeljica Integriranog kolektiva za istraživanje pokreta – IMRC, izvedbenog i
edukacijskog projekta za plesače s invaliditetom i bez njega.
Članica je Nomadske plesne akademije i suradnica Centra za
ženske studije. Školovala se na Northern School of Contemporary Dance u Leedsu.
performance: Move-r
performance: Move-r < Move-r, Photo: Iva Korenčić Čabo >
IVA NERINA SIBILA
How to Rearrange
Notions and Turn
the Night-Day
into Day-Night
On the performance Move-r, choreographed by Aleksandra Janeva Imfeld
and the Studio – Contemporary Dance Company
,,
A
esthetically, [choreography] is turning away
from established notions of dance with its
strong association with skill and craft, instead
establishing autonomous discourses that override causalities between conceptualization, production, expression and representation. At the same time it is gaining
momentum on a political level as it is placed in the
middle of a society to large degree organized around
movement, subjectivity and immaterial exchange.”1
The performance Move-r (Pokret-ač) by Aleksandra
Janeva Imfeld2 was created for the dancers of the Studio –
1
From the introductory text for the conference Choreography
As Expanded Practice, Situation, Movement, Object, held in Barcelona from 29th to 31st March 2012, organized by the University of
Dance and Circus Stockholm, Barcelona Museum of Contemporary
Art, Antoni Tàpies Foundation, and Mercat de les Flors Dance House.
The author of the conference programme is Mårten Spångberg in
collaboration with Bojana Cvejić and Xavier Le Roy. https://choreographyasexpandedpractice.wordpress.com.
2
Aleksandra Janeva Imfeld (1975) graduated from the School of
Contemporary Dance in Zagreb. She studied dance at academies in
Contemporary Dance Company and in collaboration with
them. The performance had its premiere at the opening ceremony of the 31st Dance Week Festival in May
2014, and it attracted broad public attention as dynamic,
remarkably funny, communicative, and visually attractive
performance.
Brugge and Lier in Belgium and in 1998, she won scholarship for the
programme danceWEB at the ImPulsTanz Festival in Vienna and a
scholarship for Jennifer Muller Company in New York. She graduated from a.pass – Advanced Performance and Scenography Studies
postgraduate programme in Bruxelles in 2012. In Croatia, danced
in the Studio – Contemporary Dance Company and Zagreb Dance
Company, and collaborated with Irma Omerzo and the BADco. collective. Concerning international scene, she collaborated with a number
of choreographers, like for instance Ismael Ivo, Ana Mondini, Brice
Leroux, David Hernandez, as well as with the Système Castafiore
company. She is one of the initiators of the Nomad Dance Academy, a
regional network with programmes that have been connecting different dance and performative artists of the Balkans region for last ten
years, and which has made a significant impact on the development of
these scenes. She is also a co-founder of the Nomad Dance Academy
Croatia which deals with decentralisation of dance.
performance: Move-r
In building Move-r, Janeva Imfeld uses unconventional, to a controlled extent anarchist approach to
choreography and format of the performance; she uses
authorial luddism and – in terms of local production
conditions – a spectacular costume extravagancy by the
costume designer Silvio Vujičić, which flirts with kitsch
and queer. Intriguing is the fact that the performance
varies from one evening to another in terms of contents
since dancers choose on their own and during performing
itself which scenes they will perform among the possible
ones and in what manner. Therefore, discussions about
the performance on the part of spectators often lead
to misunderstandings, because what is seen mutates,
although development and structure of the performance
are defined. Originally created by means of in situ method
in the black studio of Zagreb Dance Centre and using
defined elements of space as elements of dramaturgy and
choreography, Move-r is continuation of a successful series
of collaborations of the Studio – Contemporary Dance
Company and independent Croatian choreographers.
Janeva Imfeld and the Studio – Contemporary Dance
Company have had a long history of relationship. Her
professional dance career began in the Studio’s Young
Ensemble, and then she danced in the performances
Stravinsky and Me (Stravinski i ja) by Matjaž Farič and
She (Ona) by Anna Papoulis after her education abroad
and presented herself as an excellent dancer. Move-r is
therefore continuation of a long term friendship and
mutual understanding. Also, this is a first large scale performance for Janeva Imfeld after 2women2brothers2meters
(2žene2brata2metra), which was realized in collaboration
with the Istrian National Theatre – City Theatre Pula in
2009. In this sense, Move-r is an important production in
terms of this author’s presence on the Croatian scene and
in terms of authorial continuity. About the collaboration
with the Studio – Contemporary Dance Company, the
author says:
“I see myself here as a moderator or regulator of a
situation and I am extremely happy with the fact that
each and every man is devoted all the time. For me, this
was an utopian situation in which conflicts were allowed,
embraced, and as such, they created lots of space for
positive and creative working conditions.”3
Aleksandra Janeva Imfeld is special on the Croatian
scene because she is intensively focused on connecting
innovative choreographic-performative tendencies with
3
Andrea Remetin, Aleksandra Janeva: Prave ideje se mogu realizirati bez obzira na financije, http://www.tportal.hr/kultura/
kulturmiks/334515/Aleksandra-Janeva-Prave-ideje-se-mogu-realizirati-bez-obzira-na-financije.html.
26 _ Kretanja 23 | 24
equally progressive practices of community self-organization and collective collaboration. By means of numerous
organizational, developmental, research, interdisciplinary,
moderatorship and educational activities, like for instance
the international network Nomad Dance Academy4 or
investigative-performative project Connector5 , Janeva
Imfeld elaborates her vision of collective, collaborative
model of authorship and decision making. She transfers
this experience straightforwardly into her authorial work,
as a method, but also as contents.
Discourse of choreography as expanded artistic and
theoretical practice in which we can recognize the area of
interest of Janeva Imfeld is summarized by Ric Allsopp:
“(…) geo-political and bio-political questions become
essentially choreographic ones: to decide who is able or
allowed to move – and under what circumstances, and
on what grounds; to decide where one is allowed to
move to; to define who are the bodies that can choose
full mobility and who are the bodies forced into displacement. The end result of this politics of mobility is that
of transforming the right for free and ample circulation
into a privilege, and then turn that privilege into a prized
subjectivity. Movement, as the ‘imperceptible par excellence’ (as Deleuze and Guattari constantly remind us),
would therefore balance between two poles: of Power
(pouvoir) and powers (pouissance) corresponding to
two different modes understanding how movement can
be politically and aesthetically activated.”6
If we observe the essence of Janeva Imfeld’s work,
the dance habitus itself, we come across a dance-improvisational method she has developed and taught on workshops and in investigative processes and which she calls
– humorously, but also mysteriously – the dots. And with
this method, on the level of the profound corporeality
in dance, she has insisted on a shift, on an organization
of the body outside the logic of dance, thus creating
a different kind of danceability. The dots introduce the
task of concentration into a dance work within which
movement becomes more complex by means of multiplication of attention and of its transfer to imagined
moving points in different parts of the body. The method
functions as a tool with which movements avoids the
usual organization, emotion, rhythm, and sequence, and
is therefore rearranged in an unexpected and always new
manner. This method is also used in Move-r, giving the
4
http://www.nomaddanceacademy.org/.
5
http://www.stuk.be/en/program/connector.
6 Ric Allsopp and André Lepecki, “Editorial: On Choreography.”
Performance Research: A Journal of the Performing Arts, On Choreography, vol. 13, Issue 1, 2008; http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/
full/10.1080/13528160802465409#.Ve2lz31nFFs.
performance: Move-r ensemble dancers coherence of a group without a fixed
choreography as well as fresh, funky dance movement.
Janeva Imfeld’s method of creating a performance
connects workshop, discussion group, and investigative-improvisational session. She rejects in advance
prepared theme or authorial aforethought and treats the
dynamics of the group, their relationships and communication in the dance studio as the contents and theme
by using methods of intensifying and raising awareness
of togetherness and presence in a moment. “All that
happens from the beginning of a rehearsal to its end
is IN,” explains the author, “everything becomes the
material and contents, nothing is left OUT, a rehearsal
is an enormous playground.”7
Each rehearsal is treated as a performance and important activities are archived by recording them in different
manners; they are revisited in subsequent performances/
rehearsals. With this, the friction of past moment with a
surge of present time has been achieved, which is a theme
present in final versions: certain dance actions are visible
reminiscences and re-performances of past ones, while a
series of decisions are being made in real time, in front of
us. Explosive collective shift, which sometimes reaches a
dadaistic atmosphere in the performance, is an invitation
to rearrange notions and their interrelations. And the
question that emerges from this work is the following:
how can we move to do that?
The space of Move-r is organized in working fashion, it seems as if it has been prepared for an informal
presentation of a work-in-progress or workshop. Stands
for the audience are recessed, and two rows of chairs
are arranged in L-shape along the width of the performance space. Lights are set as if for working conditions8 ,
audio and lighting console is installed almost within the
space of audience. The doors towards the corridor are
open, crammed with cardboard boxes, glued into one
big carpet9 . The opened doors provide the feeling of
permeability, incompleteness. There is something unusual in organization of sizes – the carpet is too big in
relation to the door, the number of spectators is too
small for the number of performers. Organization of the
space invites the ones who are late as well, moreover, a
wandering student from the neighbouring studio may
also round up in the performance. Dancers, as much as
eight of them (Ana Vnučec, Martina Tomić, Ana Mrak,
Dina Ekštajn, Matea Bilosnić, Bosiljka Vujović Mažuran,
7
From private correspondence via e-mail with Aleksandra Janeva
Imfeld.
8
Light design: Aleksandar Čavlek.
9
Scenography: Silvio Vujičić, Mladen Donadini and Move-rs.
Branko Banković, and Bruno Isaković) move softly, in a
group, and yet each in his or her own way. The movement is reserved, slow. Isolated head and hip movements
dominate, and hands are almost completely still. They
seem rather grotesque: awkward beings searching for
direction, with occasional accentuated falls and changes
of places. Their clothes are casual, urban, almost private,
thus stressing individualities.
A small CD-player plays cover of Nina Simon’s Sinnerman.10 The choice of music as the introduction to the
performance is by no means accidental, bearing in mind
activist engagement of the controversial diva of souljazz and unconventional shows in which she combined
different aspects of performative qualities. The music,
although quiet, is euphoric, contagious. The key motif
is almost mantric repetition of the word “power.” The
music motivates, yet the dancers resist this drive, they
remain in a slow, halted tempo.
Dance action is at first organized in recognizable codes
of the children’s games Follow the Leader and Day-Night,
which becomes quicker and quicker until it disintegrates
and which obviously represents a joy for dancers. This
playful introduction to the performance reduces or disassembles the notion of choreography to children’s game, to
simple rules that organize kinetics of the group, leaving
each and every one of them to react with their own dance
intuition. The choreography is therefore a byproduct of
the game by means of which two significant themes of
the Move-r are established: collective authorship and
the question of originality. The team of authors explain:
“In this performance, the choreographer is involved
in questioning originality, copying, and ownership over
ideas... Move-rs think that it is impossible to repeat any
acton in exactly the identical manner, and they use copying and mutation for creation of new originals.”11
The code of the game, very directly set at the beginning, is a decisive and arrogant demystification of the
artistic, in other words of the title of choreographer-director. Furthermore, it is confirmation that a saturation
with convenient choreographic trends, which mobilize
dancers within one poetics and transfer the field of interest and experience of one author, has occurred.
The following action performed by dancers collectively is sticking an adhesive tape on the carpet, made
of brown cardboard boxes which they carry inside from
the corridor. Dancers are occupied with this senseless
activity. Sound and rhythm produced by unwrapping of
10 Sound: Marin Živković.
11 http://www.plesnicentar.info/hr/
predstave/9-arhiva-predstava/705-pokret-ac.
performance: Move-r
the adhesive tape becomes the sound background of the
action and then, with its duration and intensification to
the level of corporeal exaggeration, it starts to produce
dance choreography. And so we reach the essence of this
performance’s structure, which can be summarized with
the following question: if we treat all the physical actions,
like work, game, dance, the utilitarian or senseless ones,
the authentic or transferred ones, equally within a performance, without making any of them privileged, by
using the principle of child naivety, which kind of twisting
stage notions will emerge here?
The subsequent action takes place on the carpet which
we recognize as a kind of archive of the process because it
is filled with notes and sketches. Dancers perform a kind
of Twister, searching for notes and leaning with parts of
their bodies on these notes; in this manner, they build a
choreography of a moment, by establishing a logic within
the archive of the process.
Simultaneously, Dina Ekštajn and Branko Banković
are dancing a duet, as the first act of anti-consensus, or
an action of an individual versus group. In this duet,
the female dancer is entirely deadened, lifeless, inert,
while the male dancer manipulates her and carries her
all over the stage, slowly losing patience on the account
of her non-cooperation. In the end, he leaves her on the
cardboards and so she also becomes part of the archive,
the past. The game continues by reading notes on the
cardboard, and the action is led by Bruno Isaković, with
occasional translations into Swedish or Russian. Why
and what is the logic behind the translation, it is not
clear to us, and in the same way as in Twister, or in
group dance sequences later on, thematising of translation and copying is evident. What do we understand
and what do we not understand, which text is real, the
physical or spoken one, and which one is imitation?
And so, the movers share with us bilingually some of
the statements written on the archive carpet that are
probably evidences of numerous group discussions.
We can only guess what is their source before coming
into the process and part of what they are: “bodies for
sale” / “lie in need motivates truth” / “one day of life
is worthier that a pile of gold” / “self-sufficient movement creates a hermetic pleasure” / “availability creates
a millions possibilities” / “and here, we are all equal,
here in Zagreb Dance Centre”...
Bruno Isaković takes over direct communication with
performers and the audience, nevertheless, he talks in
the mover’s language, omitting vocals. He poses questions
about originality of the performance, he comments on
the question of the power of institutions like Zagreb
Dance Centre or the Croatian National Theatre, and then
28 _ Kretanja 23 | 24
he symbolically gives them as present to people in the
audience with a gesture of court jester.
The action goes back to a dance game of all together,
which is the central part of the performance. Contents
of these segments vary from performance to performance, and the tasks that dancers elaborate are copying
of movements, exchange of positions and mutating, in
other words, variations of movement sequences. In one
performance, we can see dancers organizing into unison groups, while in another they work on the theme
of jumps, always using similar principles. What are all
the possible options that exist and how many possible
versions of Move-r are there, in other words, how many
performances would be needed to be able to see the
entire scope of variations? It is interesting and intriguing
that in spite of variations in the choreographic material,
the impression about performance remains the same. This
means that in spite of the difference occurring within segments, their sum is the same entirety. In this statement,
we again find the blade with which Aleksandra Janeva
Imfeld questions choreographic traditions, in other words
her premeditated authorial anarchism.
As the fixed points in the performance, we find
the impressionable individual expression of Ana Mrak
who, entirely unexpectedly, dances on well known Air
by Bach12 , recorded in distortion of the sound, which
is expected within the aesthetics of the performance.
The dancer performs a solo, concentrated, immersed
and carried away by dance: her fists are clenched, she is
in deep squats, doing broad transitions of weight, and
falling. Movement and enthusiasm that Air brings about
is produced for her by other move-rs, who drive her all
over the space on the cardboard carpet, forcing her to
increase dynamics in order to retain control and balance.
And this scene, created standardly in terms of dance,
becomes remarkably ironic in tone with the idea of the
flying carpet.
Already mentioned individual in the community of
equals, Dina Ekštajn, performs a solo action in every
performance in which she passes right next to the audience, sneaking, and softly whispering. This passing is
different in terms of costume and a moment within the
performance, but it always lasts long, even longer than
the performance itself, until the applause is over.
The second part of the performance is marked by
dramatic transportation of the cardboard carpet to the
golden side, with dramatic change of light that completely
transforms the space and during the performance, dancers
change clothes into impressive costumes in which gold,
12
Orchestral Suite No 3 in D Major, 2: Air, Ed.
performance: Move-r red, and black colours dominate. In this second and final
part, Move-r deals with hyper-theatricality, maximal irony
of theatre magic, and complete arbitrariness of dramaturgy.
And so, dancers who are dressed like characters from
different theatre-fashion visions walk among the audience
and group into an organism that moves in slow motion,
lightly, and gradually disintegrates.
No matter to what extent it is collective, this performance provides dancers with enough space to build
individual attitude. Ana Vnučec performs a fragmented,
reserved solo on the golden carpet that hovers around
her, in which she moves one part of her body after another thus creating an impression of a futuristic dystopia and
repression of the body. Martina Tomić, with fluid and
soft movement, is of more open, seductive appearance.
The young Matea Bilosnić is playful, decisive, and lucid,
while the mover+, Bosiljka Vujović Mažuran, appears in a
different role. She communicates with the audience and
only occasionally enters the space of dance, opening up
marginal inter-zones of the performance. Branko Banković is concentrated, discrete presence, with minutely
elaborated movements, while Isaković is pure opposition
with his unrestrained explosive corporeality and humorous role of the host of the talk show.
The need to cross the boundaries of dance genre,
entering into the domain of the public and theoreti-
cal, as well as creation of confusion within the existing
architecture of values is further stressed by the game
of renaming the key actors in the dance production:
the author or choreographer becomes a moderator or
mover, and performers become movers. The audience
as a constitutive partner in the performative event, is
here also treated carefully: spectators were invited to
attend rehearsal performances, which were called “the
performance of the day,” surprisingly early in relation
to the defined date of the premiere, which decisively
eliminated the division into working material and final
product. During performances, the audience that is sitting
in line with the performers become open and willing
interlocutor due to frequent communication with the
performers.
Are we playing Day-Night or Night-Day? Is the right
side the worn out cardboard or glimmering gold? Is the
performance the truth or does it have to function as
travesty and lie? The organized chaos by the Studio’s
Move-r invites to slalom through these zones, while the
beginning, the end, and any attempt to make a logical
conclusion are clouded. In this work, open and crystal
clear are numerous potentials of collective authorship as
well as numerous risks that collective authorship brings
about which, together with conflicts and mistakes, this
work simply embraces.
interview: Branko Banković
interview: Branko Banković < Move-r, Photo: Iva Korenčić Čabo >
IVA NERINA SIBILA
A New Kind
of Freedom
Interview with
Branko Banković
B
ranko Banković is a dancer with impressive biography. He started to dance in the Studio’s Young
Ensemble within the Studio – Contemporary
Dance Company and since 1984, he has been a permanent
member of this ensemble. In thirty years of his career,
he has participated in almost all of the productions of
the ensemble. Let us mention some of them: Quartet ’78
(Kvartet ’78) by Zagorka Živković; Brandenburg Gate by
Desanka Virant; Metamorphoses (Metamorfoze), Rubato,
Big iz bju;tiful, Kaputt, A Woman who Speaks Too Much
(Žena koja puno priča), Marathon (Maraton), Gyekenyes
Band and Going Up (Na putu prema gore) by Mirjana Preis;
Tchi-Tchiao by Kilina Cremona; Stravinski and Me (Stravinski i ja) and The Rite of Spring (Posvećenje proljeća) by
Matjaž Farič; Giselle by Adriaan Luteijn; Identity of Touch,
Rhythm of Mathematics (Identitet dodira, ritam matematike) by Gregor Luštek; Theatre of Love (Kazalište ljubavi)
by Dario Harjaček; Sale by Ksenija Zec; Spirit (Prone to
Change) (Duh /sklon promjeni/) by Maja Drobac; History
of Watching (Povijest gledanja) by Oliver Frljić; Large by
Sanja Tropp Frühwald; Surprised Body Project – Zagreb
by Francesco Scavetta; Move-r (Pokret-ač) by Aleksandra
Janeva Imfeld; Denuded (Nečastive) by Bruno Isaković.
He has also danced in the Studio – Contemporary Dance
Company’s productions for children, like for instance:
From One Story to Another (Iz priče u priču), Magical Chalk
Čarobna kreda), The Fairy Doll (Vila lutaka) by Zagorka
Živković and Desanka Virant; Who Still Believes in Storks?
(Tko još vjeruje u rode?), Am I Stupid? (Zar sam ja glup?),
Ugly Duckling (Ružno pače), The Nightingale (Slavuj) and
Chocolate (Čokolada) by Desanka Virant; and Scheherazade
(Šeherezada) by Ksenija Zec.
Apart from being the Studio’s ensemble dancer, he
has danced in productions by Zagreb Dance Company,
dance project llinkt!, the Ballet of the Croatian National
Theatre in Zagreb, Dance Centre TALA, Kilina Cremona’s Tangram Dance, the Istrian National Theatre – City
Theatre Pula, Experimental Free Scene, as well as in a
number of dramatic performances in almost all of the
city theatres. He has intensively been active as dance
pedagogue and choreographer in dance centres and companies throughout Croatia. Moreover, he introduced
a production by t he Studio – Contemporary Dance
Company, The Rite of Spring by Matjaž Farič, to the Ana
Maletić’s School of Contemporary Dance and adapted
this production for an ensemble that consisted of twenty
two dancers who were graduates of the school within
the course Stage Practice.
With the theatre director and dramaturge Dubravka
Zrnčić-Kulenović, he has created a number of performances in collaboration with the Puppetry Studio Sarajevo,
the Sarajevo War Theatre, the Sarajevo National Theatre,
and the Ivana Brlić-Mažuranić Children’s Theatre from
Slavonski Brod.
He won the Croatian Theatrical Award for the Best
Realization in Dance in the Season 2003/2004 for his
male roles in the performances Something, Maybe Personal (Nešto, možda, sasvim osobno) by the choreographer
Snježana Abramović Milković and Kaputt by the choreographer Mirjana Preis; the Award for the Best Stage
Movement at the Festival of Bosnian and Herzegovinian
Drama in Zenica in 2002 for the choreodrama Odkamen
by the Sarajevo War Theatre based on a text by Mak
Dizdar and directed by Dubravka Zrnčić-Kulenović; and
the Award for the Best Performance at the Puppetry
Biennale Bugojno in 2011 for the performance The Little
Match Girl (Djevojčica sa šibicama)1 by the Puppetry Studio Sarajevo and Altteatar. Also, he received the Coat of
Arms of Slavonski Brod recognition in 2014 for twenty
years of professional and creative work with the education component, for his patience, long-term friendship,
and moral support to children, teachers and employees
of the Ivana Brlić-Mažuranić Theatre and Concert Hall.
Since 2013, he has been the president of the Croatian
Dancers Association.
¬ In this conversation, I am interested in addressing the relation of a dancer to his or her own performing. I would like to discuss your dance biography, influences, formative performances and
encounters and, using that together with your point
of view, I would like to see what a dance work consists of. What happens within the triangle of body
– choreography – performing in different stages of
a dance career. In other words, after thirty years
on stage, I assume that your perception of stage
and of your own self as a performer has changed...
How does your beginning look like from today’s
point of view?
Today’s approach to dance and creation of a performance is enormously different from that when I began
to work. The first performance I was involved in as a
dancer was Crash – The Case of N Sisters (Crash – slučaj
sestara N) by the choreographer Suzana Sliva2 in 1985,
1
Screenplay and directing: Dubravka Zrnčić-Kulenović; co-directing, scene movement and music design: Branko Banković; actors:
Alena Džebo-Hećo and Jasminka Požek-Božuta; costume, video and
graphic design: Naida Begović and Adisa Vatreš; puppets: Ivanka
Hristova-Radeva; production: Slaven Vidak; technical Support: Husein Mazrak.
2
Suzana Sliva, dancer and choreographer, graduated from the
School for Rythm and Dance in Zagreb and was a member of the
Studio – Contemporary Dance Company as dancer as well as choreographer of several full-length performances. She established Absolute
Movement Ensemble in 1998. She has been a guest choreographer in
the Zagreb City Theatre Comedy.
32 _ Kretanja 23 | 24
which was produced by the Studio – Contemporary
Dance Company. As a beginner, initially I had to achieve
a certain technical level of performing. At that time,
performances were created in different manner: a choreographer would give us finished dance material and
then practising would follow. After that, each dancer
would add their personal interpretative quality, which
she or he would either produce alone or in collaboration
with the choreographer, but this would occur later on
when the choreography had already been well rehearsed.
We rarely created together with a choreographer. The
exception was Mirjana Preis3 who would always open the
process to the dancers. As a rule, we were given finished
material and then we were supposed to reproduce it.
These were large scale performances for ensembles with
group scenes that required quite some time of group
rehearsals in the studio. We had many reruns and this
offered opportunity for every dancer in the performance
to develop their interpretations. I regret that many performances do not have such an opportunity today. The
first performance with a different process, and with this
I mean the work within an ensemble, was Tchi-Tchiao by
Kilina Cremona4 . This performance turned my world
upside down.
¬ Let us please go back to the beginning and to
working with Suzana Sliva. How old were you at
that time?
I was sixteen.
¬ How did you end up in dance?
Unintentionally. I have twin sister who was attending
rhythmics course taught by Branka Kolar in Dugo Selo,
where we lived at that time. She was a dancer in the
Studio – Contemporary Dance Company back then. I
used to go there to collect my sister after the course, but
3
See the Note 2 for Mirjana Preis in the essay Consciousness of the
Body and Corporeality of Consciousness by Dejan Košćak, page183.
4
Kilina Cremona (1947) is a French dancer, choreographer, and
dance pedagogue. She was educated by Karin Waehner in Paris and
in the Merce Cunningham Studio in New York, where she started her
career as a dance pedagogue later on. Apart from the Merce Cunningham Dance Company, she also danced for Meredith Monk, David
Gordon, Twyla Tharp, and Viola Farber. After her return to France, she
founded Kilina Cremona and Roger Méguin Company in Lyon in 1980,
and after that her own company Tangram Dance. She moved to Zagreb
in 1995. She founded Athena Dance Centre, where she acted as dance
pedagogue and choreographer. In Zagreb, she was intensively involved
in teaching, which she continued to do in Split as well. After her return
to Lyon, and also in connection with her increasing hearing problems,
she established Les Ateliers Desmaé dance centre in 2002 where she
has worked with deaf and hearing-impaired dancers as well as has carried out research of contemporary dance in relation to sign language.
interview: Branko Banković when the winter came I could not wait for her outside
any longer, so Branka Kolar invited me to come upstairs
and I made an attempt as well. At first, I felt awfully
uncomfortable. Nevertheless, there was a moment, and
I remember it as if it was yesterday, when we were
improvising and the theme was Alice who travelled all
over the world. We were motivated by Branka Kolar
to create different kinds of movement and so I found
myself in Africa and I was a hunter and I was hunting a
panther! I was in the fourth grade of elementary school
at that time and this was the moment when the world
of dance opened up in front of me, and I learnt to love
so much this world that I have still been here today. It
was a fortune that exactly Branka Kolar was the teacher
of the course, because she was teaching with tremendous
passion, heart, and creativity, and because of her I fell in
love with dance. We did not find hard to organize a bus
and see performances in Zagreb, and the most wonderful
thing was the fact that I started to live for dance. Ever
since then I have danced, and if we talk about formal
education, I graduated from the School of Applied Arts
and Design.
¬ Have you ever thought about continuing your
formal education at the Academy of Fine Arts?
Yes, but I gave up the idea because I was invited to
go to France, to Mathilde Monnier’s summer academy
in Montpellier. Sanja Dević5 and I went there. During
the seminar, Mathilde Monnier invited us to join her
company, she offered us a three-year contract. But, we
had already agreed to work on the performance Stravinsky and Me (1995) with Matjaž Farič6 in the Studio –
Contemporary Dance Company. And so we returned
to Zagreb.
¬ This was the time when Kilina Cremona was in
Zagreb?
Yes. The Studio was preparing a performance for the
thirtieth anniversary of the ensemble. One year earlier,
we had seen Kilina Cremona’s Symphonie Solitude at the
seventh Dance Week Festival, the winner of the compe5
Sanja Dević, a former dancer in the Studio for Contemporary
Dance Company, Branko Banković’s wife.
6
Matjaž Farič (1965), a Slovene dancer, choreographer and theatre director, is one of the key figures of the Slovene contemporary
dance. He was educated at the Ballet School in Maribor, Palucca
School in Dresden and in 2010, he graduated from the Academy of
Theatre, Film, Radio and Television in Ljubljana. He has realized more
than thirty five dance performances and has been awarded with
numerous international recognitions. He is the artistic director of the
Flota dance company and the Front of Contemporary Dance Festival
in Murska Sobota.
tition the International Meeting of Dance of Bagnolet,
and we were amazed by the performance. Therefore,
Mirna Žagar as the director of Dance Week Festival and
Zaga Živković7 invited Kilina for collaboration. One year
later, we had the premiere of the performance Tchi-Tchiao
(1993). This performance and the process of its creation
entirely changed my perception of dance as well as that
of other dancers. After the premiere, Kilina Cremona
offered me and Sanja to go to Montpellier.
¬ What was like to work with Mathilde Monnier?
She is wonderful! We were never able to tell how
long her class would last, one hour or four hours. The
class was clean in lines, very demanding in technical
terms, and the second part of the day she would work
on improvisation. She was extraordinary in leading us
through tasks. We worked in an old church with stained
glass, it was magical... At that time she was preparing
Antigone, she wanted me and Sanja to join the project;
her idea was to connect folklore dancers from a small
African village with dancers of contemporary dance and
to find shared dance language of the performance. It was
really intriguing and provocative for a dancer.
¬ Do you regret the fact that you did not stay in
France and use this opportunity? Your professional
lives would certainly look different...
I had two opportunities to leave in my career. The
first one was this one and the second one was when
I worked on Identifying the Landscape (Prepoznavan7
Zagorka Zaga Živković (1947) is a Croatian dancer, choreographer, and dance pedagogue. She graduated from the School for Rythm
and Dance in the class of Ana and Vera Maletić in 1965. She further
developed professionally at summer academies in Köln and Rovinj
where she was introduced to the Graham dance technique. Subsequently, she was intensively involved in teaching this technique and she
also used it in her choreographies. She became a member of the Studio – Contemporary Dance Company in 1963 and she was one of its
most prominent dancers and choreographers (Musica antiqua motio
nova 1974, Concertino 1975, Quartet ’78 1978, Espace da la Solitude
1979, Quartet ’79 1979, Sinfonietta 1983, Encounter /Susret/ 1989).
She was the artistic director of the ensemble from 1978 to 1997. From
1972 to 1976, she was a member of the international group of artists
Arte Viva (Italy) as a dancer and choreographer. As dance pedagogue,
she was teaching in the Studio ensemble as well as in the Ana Maletić’s
School of Contemporary Dance (1990–1995). In 1990, she started her
continuous teaching in the International Cultural Centre of Croatian
Musical Youth in Grožnjan. She has been an assistant for stage movement and choreography in numerous Croatian dramatic performances
and puppet plays, operettas (The Land of Smiles /Zemlja smiješka/,
Orpheus in the Underworld /Orfej u podzemlju/) and musicals (Kaj2O, Caroline of Rijeka /Karolina Riječka/). She was an active dancer
until 1990. As a dancer, she was characterized by expressive interpretation and powerful technique and as an author, she most often used
abstract form and choreographic interpretation of classical music.
je krajolika, 1996) with Zagreb Dance Company and
in coproduction with the Lanònima Imperial Dance
Company from Barcelona. Their choreographer Juan
Carlos García offered me and Ivančica Horvat to join
his company.
¬ And Ivančica Horvat joined and left?
Yes, and I did not... out of private reasons... (laughter)
At that moment, I would not have left Croatia for anything in the world. And I am not sorry, no. I accepted the
space in which I have lived and to me, my private life,
my marriage, this kind of emotional stability are crucial.
I would not sacrifice that. It is the most beautiful thing
that has happen in my life.
¬ At the very early phase, before Kilina Cremona,
when you were about to leave the Young Ensemble
and join the Studio ensemble, can you go back to
the performances and processes that were significant for your development, those that you would
call formative?
At that time, there were eleven female dancers and
six male dancers in the Studio and it was not very easy
to be chosen for a performance. I was lucky to become a
member of the Studio – Contemporary Dance Company
ensemble because I was able to practice in the studio
every day and apart from that, I also attended classes
of the Young Ensemble three times a week. In 1986,
I was chosen for Quartet ’78 by Zaga Živković which
was a remarkably dancing performance in which music
by Antonín Dvořák was not a sound background but
rather inspiration for dance, transferred into movement.
I remember exceptionally imaginative group scenes
in terms of choreography and a beautiful duet in the
second act, danced by Bosiljka Vujović-Mažuran and
Darko Kolar. To dance with live music, played by Zagreb
Quartet, in a large ensemble was priceless experience
for me, a young dancer at that time. One year later,
in 1987, I had fortune to perform in the performance
Metamorphoses (1986) by Mirjana Preis, inspired by the
Ovid’s myths, with a team of prominent authors (dramaturge Krešimir Dolenčić, scenographer Dinka Jeričević,
costume designer Ika Škomrlj). This was a performance
with thirteen dancers, powerful group scenes, male parts
and duets; it was a demanding performance in terms
of performing and interpretation. After that, Suzana
Sliva invited me to join The Ballad of a King (Balada o
kralju, 1988) and this was the first time that I was given
solo parts. The rehearsal coach of the performance was
then the Studio’s ballet pedagogue Guy Perkov and I
worked a lot with him in order to achieve technical
34 _ Kretanja 23 | 24
self-confidence. This performance was demanding for
me in terms of performing, but we had many reruns
and as a result, I had opportunity for the first time to
develop my role during quite some time of performing.
This was followed by Pass-through Room (Prolazna soba,
1990) and Rubato (1992) by Mirjana Preis, performances
that were created in close collaboration with dancers:
lots of material resulted from improvisational sessions.
Moreover, a wonderful dance collaboration with Sanja
Zimmer happened here. These performances were also
marked by collaboration of Mirjana Preis and the director
and dramaturge Nana Šojlev who adapted and recorded these performances for the Croatian Television. The
work on these adaptations was very interesting because
the authors changed and adapted scenes for the eye of
camera, which added new meanings, since it was not
possible to have such scenes in stage conditions. At that
time, the first dance video was created, Suzana’s Diary
(Suzanin dnevnik), as coproduction of the Studio – Contemporary Dance Company and the Croatian Television.
This was a completely different approach to obtaining
dance material, choreography of face gestures, muscles...
It was the first time for me to dance a duet in the air,
since Sanja Zimmer and I were dancing on Dubravko
Detoni’s waltz hanging, tied to climbing ropes!
¬ This was the time when Dance Week Festival,
established in 1984, was at its beginning. This festival’s programme brought important international
artists to Zagreb. Connections established at this festival were extremely important for the generation
that was emerging at that time because there were
few information about dance otherwise. It was difficult to obtain recordings and the Internet was not
available at that time. What is your relationship with
this festival? Can you recall some of the performances
from the first issues of Dance Week Festival that were
important to you?
Yes, it is difficult to imagine today that information is not available and communication with other
countries is slow! Dance Week Festival enabled us to
connect with Kilina Cremona and after our premiere
she decided to stay in Zagreb. Her work as a pedagogue
left a huge mark on our scene. For us, the Festival was
then the window into the international scene. If we
talk about performances at first issues of Dance Week
Festival, the most important performance for me was
Im Bade wannen by Susanne Linke. It was presented
at the fourth Dance Week Festival in 1987, and I still
carry this performance in my subconsciousness. After
this performance, I could not sleep... The impression
interview: Branko Banković was so intense. And then, Trisha Brown’s performance
at t he sevent h Dance Week Festival, it took me far
away8 … In terms of performing, I was delighted by the
Netherlands Dance Theatre one year later9 , above all
with corporeality of dancers, and the performances as
such were not so amazing, they were dealing with the
external – appearance and shape of movement. From
today’s point of view, the most important influence for
me was that of Susanne Linke.
¬ I remember this performance very well. Quite
a number of us were totally mesmerized with her
power and poetry. After the performance, she also
had a workshop as part of Dance Week Festival, and
I remember it was held in the studio of Lado…
Yes, I was there! Of course! We were all there! There
is also an anecdote related to my fascination with the
performance: at that time, I belonged to younger generation of dancers in the Studio – Contemporary Dance
Company (there were six male dancers) and I was actually
alone in feeling such a delight about the performance.
They did not feel about the performance the way I did,
and since I would not stop talking about it, my male
colleagues made jokes all the time on my account and
called me the plumber. (laughter)
¬ The Studio traveled a lot. Can you locate encounters that were important to you and important performances on these travels? Influences and relationships
that have changed you in some way?
I really had many guest performances with the Studio! I remember that we were preparing the opening
ceremony of the Universiade in 1987 when we received
news about a big tour in former USSR and Poland. We
had performances in six cities (Moscow, Riga, Pärn, Warsaw, Katowice and Wrocław) with five performances10 .
These were not performances presented at festivals, but
in theatre houses. The tour was long and tiresome, but
extremely successful. A team of twenty two dancers and
technicians, from airplane into a theatre, then into a
hotel, and then again to an airplane... In Wrocław, we
danced two encores and this was the last movement of
8
Three choreographies by Trisha Brown were performed: Lateral
Pass (1985), Astral Convertible (1989), Opal Loop (1980).
9
Choreographies that were performed were: Un Ballo and Stoolgame by Jiří Kylián, Jardí Tancat by Nach Duat, and Passomezzo by
Ohad Naharin.
10 Quartet ’78 by Zaga Živković, Prelude to the Afternoon of a Faun
(Preludij za poslijepodne jednog fauna) and Metamorphoses by Mirjana Preis, Harlequin (Harlekin) by Desanka Virant, The Pavane (Pavana)
by Darko Kolar.
Quartet ’78. It was the first time I experienced standing
ovations of an entire theatre...
I remember Seul in 1988. When we landed on the
airport and the mobile doors opened, thirty television
teams were waiting for us and we were not at all aware
of that fact! We had three guest performances: Quartet
’78, Metamorphoses and The Ballad of a King. On that
occasion, we had opportunity to see the entire festival
and the American scene had quite a few representatives. I was especially delighted by the American female
dancer Janne Bersciani who was renewing dances by
Isadora Duncan. I was amazed with her contemplation on the freedom of movement and a body. At that
time, t he Studio’s performances were flirting wit h
stressed expressiveness and large accent was put on
the technique of performing. These were late 1980s,
experiment and search for new freedom of movement
were less in focus, which was the focal point of early
generations of the Studio. Older members talked a lot
about that and, naturally, I had some ideas about that
via video recordings. I was fascinated by Janne Bersciani
because of her thinking about the freedom of a body,
about the fact that a body has to be free to a certain
extent in order to say something. Of course, we have
to educate our instrument to some degree, but after
that the body has to go beyond the limits and when
liberation commences, it is important that the artist
is mature and knows where to lead the body in this
process of liberation. Otherwise, it is very easy for a
dancer to be lost...
¬ Actually, you are talking about discipline of
basic education and then about the path to one’s
own artistic practice and personality, which often
requires opposing the learned, a sort of un-education. Nevertheless, you do not have formal dance
education. You have been educated by working in the
ensemble and by attending workshops. How do you
perceive that fact now? Do you feel you are lacking
a certificate from an institution on your artistic and
professional path?
It would be easier for me if I had a certificate because
our system does not support informal education and I am
extremely interested in dance pedagogy and I would like
to teach at local dance institutions. On the other hand,
I had this freedom to decide what was good for me at a
particular moment during the time I was being formed
as a dancer. I have acquired many of my competences by
working on performances, and I think it was priceless.
Today, I see young people graduate from an academy,
and they really know a lot and they are excellent, but
they see things in a similar manner. I see groups, both in
terms of generation and in terms of style. I really rarely
see freedom of thinking. This is probably the reason
why I love being in the Studio for so long and why I
agree to be there – because performances that we do are
entirely different.
I have been educated in the Studio in form of everyday practising and working on performances with Croatian and foreign authors, as well as in form of attending
workshops within the ensemble and elsewhere. I danced
in performances with dancers and made by authors who
were the earliest generations of the ensemble, which is
important for understanding our context. We were then
practising classical ballet that was coached by Silva Muradori and Guy Perkov, Graham technique was coached by
Zaga Živković, a combination of modern and jazz dance
techniques was coached by Branka Kolar, Mirjana Preis
and Desanka Virant, and jazz dance was coached by Darko
Kolar. We attended workshops all the time. Following
that, I acquired most systematical education from Kilina
Cremona, who entirely changed my experience of body
as an instrument. Because of that, I am endlessly grateful
to her. A kind of liberation happened not only to me,
but to an entire generation.
¬ A change of generation occurred in the Studio
at that time, which followed changes in operation
methods and the tempo of everyday practice and
rehearsals.
Yes, Bosiljka Vujović-Mažuran became the artistic
director in 1998. She changed operation methods and
repertory in terms of artistic approach. After the work
with Kilina Cremona, Desanka Virant, Ante Jurić, Drago
Asić Lika, Andrija Laboš Jerry, Suzana Sliva, and Sanja
Zimmer, who was an excellent performer, left the ensemble. The middle generation that included Sanja Dević,
Ana Šaškor Jurić, Bojan Valentić, Marinko Čorak and me
was joined by a number of young dancers, like Tamara
Curić, Larisa Navojec, Aleksandra Janeva Imfeld, Ivančica
Horvat... At that time, the performance She (Ona), choreographed by Ann Papoulis, was in preparation. It was
a very interesting performance, an experiment of voice
and body that introduced the new dancers in the ensemble. I remember that Branko Magdić wrote an excellent
review. Ann Papoulis is also an excellent dance pedagogue
of Cunningham technique, so we also had classes with
her all the time during the process. I have to say that
Bosiljka Vujović-Mažuran, as a director of an ensemble,
has always allowed the Studio dancers to collaborate
with other ensembles and choreographers, not seeing
this as competition, but as further artistic development
36 _ Kretanja 23 | 24
for the members, and as opening up to the scene and
collaboration.
¬ Then Stravinsky and Me by Matjaž Farič happened.
This was t he transition period in managing t he
ensemble, when Bosiljka Vujović-Mažuran succeeded
Zaga Živković, an entirely different work. We worked
in coproduction with Dance Week Festival and Zagreb
Youth Theatre.
¬ I remember the performance, it was really excellent. So, after Kilina Cremona another crucial name
was Farič?
He staged two performances in the Studio, Stravinski
and Me and The Rite of Spring (2004). Both were extremely
demanding technically, in terms of body and interpretation. Great performing readiness was required for such
a work. As an ensemble, we had to work a lot in order
to maintain the performing level continuously. Before
performing, we needed at least two weeks of rehearsals
to prepare our bodies to present the performance to the
audience in its original form. We did many reruns and
toured a lot with this performance.
¬ One of your motivations is, then, physically high
standard of a choreography?
Absolutely yes! It was important in this performance
that the entire ensemble, apart from their personal interpretations, moved to their utter limits during performing,
but to do that with awareness. Rehearsals were really
long until all of us, as an ensemble, felt what were these
boundaries that we were supposed to reach. Music was
extremely powerful and it took a long time to find almost
equal relation in movement. Vilim Matula acted in the
performance as well, and apart from the music by Stravinsky, there was heavy metal music by the band Killing
Joke. Last scene was the most difficult: after almost one
hour of dancing we entered a scene with even faster
tempo. It was the first time for me to truly cross over
the limitations of my body, pain, and tiredness, that I
entered that space in which you could really do anything.
¬ Is that the most demanding performance that you
have performed?
Yes. There were demanding and difficult performances
after that, but there was space in them for taking breath.
This was one hour without break in a furious tempo.
¬ And The Rite of Spring?
In this work, Farič was exclusively dealing with the
energy of the entire scene and he would build that in our
interview: Branko Banković improvisations. It did not include significant dance individuality, nevertheless, we established close connection as
an ensemble and we managed to raise and lower energy
and to twist space in accordance with choreography and
music. The Rite was really interesting performance in
terms of dancing: as there were ten of us in the ensemble,
there was always someone who would come to the performance with a different kind of energy than normally.
And then, it was necessary to find the frequency where all
of us would come together. This was interesting. And it
all happened during the performing. Today, performances
are different, such an approach is rarely seen on stage.
¬ Recently you were again choreographing, with
students of the Ana Maletić’s School of Contemporary
Dance?
Yes, and I have to mention great assistance on the part
of Dina Ekštajn, who was also a dancer in the premiere
cast. I involved these energies again and for me as a person who was not performing, the most difficult part was
to explain to dancers, to make understandable, the idea
of raising performative energy together, as an ensemble.
And there were twenty two of them. I wanted them to
be able to modulate energy and dynamics in the way a
performer is supposed to in this type of a performance.
¬ Could you explain this a little? Are you talking
about a shared frequency, resonance?
The initial idea for the collaboration of the Studio
– Contemporary Dance Company and the School of Contemporary Dance referred merely to fragments of the
performance. However, when I became aware of dancing
capabilities of the students and their immeasurable energy potential as well as desire, I decided to do the entire
performance, having faith that the young dancers were
able to succeed. My desire was to lead them through
the process of creating a performance and choreography
and in this sense, I adapted the libretto and the existing
choreography for twice as many dancers. In spite of the
fact that part of choreographic material was defined,
I gave the dancers tasks that were of improvisational
character. All the solos, duets, and trios were created as
improvisation work on the part of students, thus providing them with familiar dance material and enabling
close connection to the performance. It is interesting that
efforts were made to retain pureness of style during the
performance, determined by use of lots of energy without
involving expressionist expressiveness. An additional
demand for students was the aspect of being in shape
while performing, and we worked a lot on it. It was very
important to use precise and responsible dose of energy
so that the performance could have been performed
without falling in energy, as well as performed to the
very end in terms of dynamics. Use of powerful music
basis full of contrasts and motifs leading to expectation,
enabled increase of expressive capabilities of the dancers,
especially in situations of sudden transitions, changes in
metrics, and unpredictable accentuation.
¬ Are you able now, with reference to these reminiscences, to define somehow your role in the dance
ensemble, as a performer, as a dancer? In other
words, since you have been in a large group for such
a long time and since you have been the producer of
the ensemble since 1998, you apparently feel good
being part of a group, a dance organism. Within the
performative situation of an ensemble, how do you
perceive yourself ?
The answer will be somewhere along the lines of
what we talked about The Rite. Numerous energies dwell
together within an ensemble. The Studio rarely has similar people, both in terms of aesthetic or corporeal principles in dance. We are very different. And therefore,
phases of the ensemble are different. There are times
when I feel the need to retreat, there are times when
I feel I should take over, but these decisions are not
conscious. This happens on intuitive level. And this kind
of behaviour in a group has not presented disappointed
so far. Bosiljka Vujović-Mažuran, as the artistic director,
has always opened up a space of trust, both artistic and
human, and it is impossible not to feel good in this space.
Of course, there is a great responsibility for the production, realization, sale...
¬ Nevertheless, there was a moment when you left
dance, you gave up. Was it enough for you?
Yes, I completely abandoned dance for a while. It was
from October 1999 to September 2001.
¬ This was after the war... Were you in the army?
Yes, I went through all of that, battlefield... At one
moment we had enough, financial situation was extremely difficult and both Sanja and me left dance and opened
a shop. And two years later, I came home and said I was
going to a dance practice. (laughter)
¬ What were you selling?
Children’s clothes. And we did well to, very well!
We had a plan to open two more shops. (laughter) And
then one day, tax inspection came and the inspector was
asking me questions about the business and I had no
idea what she was talking about. Then she recognized
me from a performance and we talked about dance, and
a question flashed inside of me like a lightning: “Branko,
what the hell are you doing?” Something broke inside of
me and I returned to dance.
¬ What does Sanja do?
Sanja is in early retirement due to serious spinal
injury, which she earned exactly in Stravinsky and Me.
She worked with Ann Papoulis after that, and then she
stopped. She could not go on. She was teaching for a long
time. At present time, she is involved in creative work,
she paints, and this is a great joy for her and for me both.
¬ You mean exactly painting?
For me, it is actually ceramics. I graduated in Ceramics
Design from the School of Applied Arts and Design. In my
graduation papers, I brought together dance and ceramics;
there were seven large vases, plates and lamps, painted
with dance motifs, each of them inspired by a different
historical period and style.
¬ And so, after having shop, you returned to dance…
I returned into a situation that was completely different. The first performance The Rush of the Soul (Žurba duše)
by Emilio Gutiérrez took me to Zagreb Dance Company.
Then I went back to the Studio to work on Giselle by
Adriaan Luteijn. And so it continued.
¬ In the time before the break, to be more precise in
1996, you also worked with Juan Carlos García in a
coproduction of Zagreb Dance Company and Lanònima Imperial. I think that this work and influence
were crucial for the generation that was active at
that time and for future direction of the ensemble.
What was this experience like for you?
It was important to me, García’s movement was
very beautiful and it was interesting to perform it, it
was free and danceable. Still, he often flirted with the
likeable in his performances. In my opinion, movement in the context he was building did not obtain
function it should have. Nevertheless, this work gave
me great quality of danceability and softness. We did
many reruns of the performance and toured a lot with
it, so we were all given opportunity to develop. Apart
from the members of Zagreb Dance Company and us,
associate dancers, there was a group of foreign dancers;
very good energy was present on rehearsals as well as
on performances.
Another change like that and an enormous struggle
for a new approach to the body and dance occurred
to me when we were in residence with the Studio in
38 _ Kretanja 23 | 24
Sweden, preparing Surprised Body Project by Francesco
Scavetta. Rehearsals were from 10 a.m. to 7.30 p.m.,
wit h one hour break. Younger colleagues from t he
Studio kept up without difficulty. I went through an
enormous crisis and wondered all the time whether I
would stay in the performance or take the next plane
and go home to Zagreb. When you are almost forty
six years old, your body has some kind of history of
movement, a mileage, and when you come to rehearsals
every day and you are searching, but every day you are
incapable and you are unable to recognize your body,
you hit against the wall, it is awful. And then at one
moment, in a late nigh conversation with Gree Kipperberg who was also a dancer in this performance and is
of the same age as me, I came to some conclusions and
realized that I took away my own liberty. It is as if you
put yourself in chains on a subconscious level over the
years and then they do not allow you to move onward
and do not allow a change. And so, from one rehearsal
to another, I managed to find strength in me, a new
kind of freedom and this movement of his. Eventually, I
loved to dance these performance and enjoyed in them.
Scavetta’s movement is truly superior, wonderful, and
I was given great help and support during these crisis
of mine by my colleagues in the ensemble, and this is
a huge thing.
¬ Since you have mentioned it, let us talk some more
about growing old on stage. You have still been in
a remarkable shape, nevertheless, one can notice
anot her, different presence in comparison wit h
younger dancers. What drives you to still be on stage?
And how to proceed? What have you not done yet,
and you would like to? It seems to me that we lack
mature performers on our scene, who would open
up another other performability.
I still have passion for practicing and for performances, I have a great fortune that the Studio provides
regular practice to maintain your body and this is very
important. In terms of genes, I am not liable to injuries,
which is also very important. When I work with younger
colleagues, I can understand their different approach.
Young people, and this is normal, have this need to prove
themselves and it is present during every rehearsal and
in every performance. They carry a great quantity of
passion and energy. In Murska Sobota in 2014, I watched
the performance Delta Victor by the La Intrusa Danza
collective, performed by Virginia García and Damián
Muñoz, at the Front of Contemporary Dance Festival.
They are both over fifty years of age. They danced in
a park and the space was enriched with their mature
interview: Branko Banković Movements 23 | 24 _ 39
performability, as well as with accurate and clear manner of communication with the audience. This work to
some extent gave me the answer to your question and
told me why I am still in this adventure. Although, to
tell the truth, rare are choreographers who would know
what to do on stage with dancers in mature years and
it seems that in Zagreb, there is also a prejudice about
elderly dancers.
The problem today is the fact that we have too many
choreographers because the system of financing directs
dancers into this category. Therefore, and perhaps this
will sound quite crude, we have depreciation of the title
of choreographer. In the times when I was beginning,
not everyone was a choreographer; a choreographer was
someone with an idea, someone you trusted, when this
person came in front of you you gave your soul and body
to their idea.
¬ I think we should not be nostalgic, another time
brings other values…
Of course, a choreographer is at present time equal
to dancers, which is a good thing on one hand. Such an
approach implies democratic quality, a different kind of
exchange, and this is good motivation for dancers. Nevertheless, the power of author is lost here, and this power is rarely seen today. Many are involved in research,
which is supposed to result in a new language of this
idea, but this turns into presentations and works-inprogress in most cases and we do not have a completed
idea – performance. Actually, today it is difficult to find
a choreographer today who would be willing to work
with a large group and who would know what to do
with them.
Let mo go back to intergenerational collaboration: it
is fortune for me that the Studio produces projects that
enable me, with my age, to collaborate and be on stage
with younger colleagues. In terms of body, I certainly
cannot compare myself with, for instance, Bruno Isaković
or Ana Vnučec who are now more superior, faster, and
stronger, but together, we can enter a space of interaction
and creation.
¬ With Bruno Isaković, a dancer who has been active
in the Studio since 2012, you created a demanding
project – Denuded. This is the third version of his
work. It began as his own solo, then developed into
a solo for Ana Vnučec, a dancer in the Studio, and
then into duets, and now it is a project for a large
ensemble. You perform this project stark naked in
utter silence. Is it the first time for you to be nude
on stage?
40 _ Kretanja 23 | 24
No, it is my third time! The first time was the poster
for The Rite of Spring, then I did Undertone by Sidney
Leoni with Experimental Free Scene. I agreed to do
this project with Isaković because I think that the idea
and methodology are artistically credible for further
development.
¬ Watching rehearsals and the performance, it
seems to me that this work is very demanding on
the level of performing. Considerable and outstanding
concentration, silence, time in slow motion, immense
focus on a large group.
Work on this performance reminded me of a performance I loved to perform, and it was The Theatre of
Love, directed by Dario Harjaček. The performance was
about duration and silence, symbols, stopped motion
and frozen gaze. Inspiration for this performance was
a collection of graphic art Théâtre d’amour from the
Baroque Period, an allegory referring to t he t heme
of love and eroticism, which I find related to Denuded. The performance Denuded opens up a connection
wit h t he spectator for every performer, t he naked
body colours t his relationship wit h t he personal,
and t he breat hing provides dynamics of movement
with durations in initiation of movement. Freedom
or capture of movement depends on breath, silences
fill the performance space with density. Interactions
with other bodies, breaths, gazes, touches provide a
performer with a new input on the level of concentration which he transfers. In terms of performing, it
is a very difficult performance, delicate; tools given
by the choreographer opened up a creation space to
every performer. Since there are eleven performers in
the ensemble, all the above mentioned components
are therefore multiplied. Energy of the performance
is created by contact between all of us, performers,
and the spectators, by the manner in which the performance is transferred to the spectators and by the
manner in which communication is established. In
terms of performing it, it has always been different
so far.
¬ Of all the performances you have seen so far, but
not the ones in which you performed, which one is
the one you would really, but really like to dance?
As I said, it is the solo by Susanne Linke…
¬ A female solo?
Well, yes! Why impose any limitations at all? And if
I could... It would be one of the performances... Let me
think about which one in particular…
interview: Branko Banković ¬ Is it perhaps Pina Bausch?
Yes. Actually, any of the performances by Pina Bausch.
¬ In ot her words, intense emotions, t heatrical
quality…
Yes.
¬ Do you know how many performances you have
performed so far?
Dance performance premieres, I think, seventy three.
If I include musicals and dramatic performances, then
one hundred and ten.
¬ If each of them had had fifteen reruns, and there
were more than that, this would have be approximately one thousand and five hundred appearances
in front of the audience?
I do not know. Really. I believe it has been more
than that…
¬ Do you have stage fright?
You know what is interesting? Yes, I do. This is not the
stage fright of a performer as it used to be. It is some sort
of exhilaration in my body that I feel and I would be very
sorry to lose it. Some sort of passion for all of it. I do care
if a performance will be a success, how we will perform,
whether the house will be full. Not because I am also
the producer and this is my responsibility, but because
it matters. If it is not important to us, then it will not be
important to anybody else. We alone are responsible for
our art. If we easily allow inadequate ways of showing
performances... You know, a performance may have poor
financial production, but it cannot lack human and artistic
involvement, it cannot be without drive. If so, then one
should not create a performance at all.
¬ At the end of this conversation, do you think that
you have had opportunity to offer all you can as a
performer? Have you had a chance to go all the way?
I have created really many projects, and there is still
space in me that seems to be unexplored. When this
feeling is lost, I will definitely leave dance. I am sorry that I have not had opportunity to create my own
authorial work. I have choreographed a lot in dramatic
performance, but not in an ensemble. I hope I will have
such an opportunity.
English translation: Lidija Zoldoš
Iva Nerina Sibila is a dance artist, educator, and critic.
She has been a member of the editorial board of Movements
Croatian Dance Magazine and a long term critic on the web
site Plesnascena.hr. Her writings have been published in a
number of publications in Croatia and abroad. In her numerous projects, she has been involved in accessibility and
visibility of dance contents, investigation of emancipation potential of dance education, and positioning of dance in wide
social context. She is the founder and head of the Integrated
Movement Research Collective (IMRC), a performative and
educational project for dancers with and without disability.
She is a member of the Nomad Dance Academy and associate
of the Centre for Women’s Studies. She was trained at the
Northern School of Contemporary Dance in Leeds.
predstava: Sola
predstava: Sola < Sola, Foto: Luka Pešun >
VEDRANA KLEPICA
Sabotaža kiča
O predstavi Sola Renate Carole Gatice i Zrinke Lukčec Kiko
P
ozicionirajući se negdje na granici između plesa i dramske predstave te na prvi pogled djelujući kao vrsta
hommagea španjolskom redatelju Pedru Almodóvaru,
Sola je zapravo minijaturni estetsko-izvedbeni eksperiment u
kojem su glavna pitanja usmjerena prema istraživanju potentnosti kiča kao sveprisutna umjetničkog stilskog fenomena.
Projekt Sola1 kazališne redateljice Renate Carole Gatice 2 i
1
Sola je premijerno izvedena u Zagrebačkom plesnom centru
4. prosinca 2014. Režija i dramaturgija: Renata Carola Gatica;
koreografija i izvedba: Zrinka Lukčec Kiko; kostimografija: Patricio
Alejandro Aguero; scenografija: Renata Carola Gatica; prijevod:
Nikolina Židek.
2
Renata Carola Gatica (Cordoba, Argentina, 9. lipnja 1978) studirala je na kazališnom odsjeku Filozofskoga fakulteta na Nacionalnom sveučilištu u Cordobi (UNC). S devetnaest godina na manifestaciji Kazališni maraton Cordobe kao nagradu osvojila je režiju
prve predstave. Otad, uz studij, kreće s redateljskom karijerom.
Osnivačica je kazališne skupine La Piaf u kojoj je deset godina djelovala kao redateljica i režirala više od petnaest predstava, gostujući
na brojnim festivalima u Latinskoj Americi. S tom je skupinom
2000. otvorila kulturni centar SalaK, gdje je tri godine radila kao
umjetnička ravnateljica te podučavala kazališnoj umjetnosti djecu,
tinejdžere i odrasle. Godine 2006. vlada Cordobe uručila joj nagradu Najbolja mlada kazališna redateljica.
Od 2007. živi u Zagrebu, gdje je u posljednjih šest godina postavila
jedanaest drama. Radila je s KUFER-om, Teatrom &TD (Argentina,
Ekstravagancija, Šarengrad i Čuj, Hamlete, čuj), Kazalištem Trešnja
(Pipi Duga Čarapa), Dječjim kazalištem Dubrava (Mala djeca, veliki
ljudi), Dječjim kazalištem Smješko (Ljubav ili smrt), Teatrom Naranča
(Pinokio, Snježna kraljica), amaterskom skupinom Ivan Goran Kovačić (Nostalgija i Ćelava pjevačica), Satiričkim kazalištem Kerempuh
(Kod Martinovih), Kazalištem Virovitica (Ćup), Zagrebačkim kazalištem mladih (#radninaslovantigona).
plesačice i koreografkinje Zrinke Lukčec Kiko prva je suradnja
tih dviju autorica te blagi odmak od predstava na kakvima su
dosad obje radile, Gatica stvarajući dominantno dramske, a
Lukčec plesne predstave.
Scenografski minimalistički uređena scena prostorno je
podijeljena na dva dijela koje razdvaja nešto što bi se moglo
definirati kao plastični zastor, trakama oblikovan tako da nam
pogled puca kroz njegove procijepe u stražnji, publici dalji
te djelomično sakriven i koloristički drukčiji drugi plan, koji
prostoru kretanja daje osjećaj dubine, začudnosti i gotovo
dramskog očekivanja. U prvom dijelu scene tek jedan televizor,
ne prastari model, ali uz nove generacije postojećih HDTVplazma i LED LCD-ova dovoljno star da već ostavlja stanovit
retro-dojam. Sve ostalo što okupira pozornost gledatelja jesu
buket ruža postavljen na televizor, tridesetak plavih balona
nasumce raspoređenih po sceni, dvodimenzionalni kartonski
izrezak prosijedog muškarca u srednjim pedesetim godinama,
nekoliko boca alkohola i crvena stolica. No na prvi pogled scenografijom ipak dominiraju stihovi neke španjolske ljubavne
balade koja se čuje u pozadini. Stihovi koji su prevedeni, uvećani, hipertrofirani i projicirani na područje koje zauzima oko
tri-četiri metra scene. Na crvenoj stolici sjedi koreografkinja i
izvođačica predstave Zrinka Lukčec Kiko, u plavom kaputiću s
krznenim ovratnikom, crvenoj suknji, dokoljenkama, srebrnim
potpeticama i velikim sunčanim naočalama. Nismo sigurni na
koga točno podsjeća, ali njezin kostim sasvim sigurno spada u
određenu kategoriju estetskog klišeja. Nečega što smo negdje
već vidjeli. Djeluje pomalo odsutno iako je okrenuta izravno
prema publici koja tek ulazi na scenu.
predstava: Sola
Iz svega navedenog jasno je da je dovoljno tek nekoliko
minimalnih audiovizualnih elemenata da bi se i gledatelju
potpuno skromna znanja o određenoj kulturi, filmografiji i nasljedstvu dalo do znanja da fikcionalni prostor koji redateljica
Renata Carola Gatica okupira na sceni Zagrebačkog plesnog
centra u predstavi Sola neodoljivo priziva estetičke odrednice
koje je u svojim filmovima postavio španjolski filmski redatelj
Pedro Almodóvar. Pa ako se zagleda malo podrobnije u retro-televizor, upravo će taj imaginarni, osrednji poznavatelj
europskog filma vjerojatno prepoznati slavne Almodóvarove
Žene na rubu živčanog sloma (1988) ili Visoke pete (1991).
Ako je stanovit vizualni identitet široj grupaciji konzumenata lako spojiv s određenim imenom ili sredinom, ili barem
podsjeća na određeni kulturni krug, umjetnički izraz, ili ga je
lako okarakterizirati kao dio nekog geografskog, političkog
i/ili nacionalnog okvira, a pogotovo ako ga je iznimno lako
reproducirati (jer već i jest dotad reproduciran mnogo puta),
onda takvu reprodukciju valja okarakterizirati kao – kič.
A kič je upravo estetički okvir ove predstave, ali i tema
kojoj se Renata Carola Gatica redovito vraća u svojim produkcijama. Bilo da ga u predstavi Šarengrad (Teatar &TD, 2011)
politički promišljeno smješta u imaginarni, ratom pogođeni
grad u kojem su ostale živjeti samo žene čiji je stvarni život
zamijenio narativ televizijske sapunice koju opsesivno prate,
pritom miješajući fikcionalno sa stvarnim, ili vrlo suptilno u
svojoj najnovijoj režiji predstave #radninaslovantigona (Zagrebačko kazalište mladih, 2015), u kojoj kič nasilno utječe
na društvena događanja i dolazi u obliku masovnih medija,
reproducirajući gotovo identični, nepromišljeni i pojednostavnjeni sadržaj za mase.
Autorice Gatica i Lukčec svojim projektom postavljaju
veoma jednostavno pitanje – što se događa s izvedbom kada
kič postane osnovna estetska kategorija? A u predstavi Sola
kič je upravo to: sam kostur predstave, gotovo ogoljen do
najjednostavnije formule – reprodukcije postojeće građe –
parodiran, hipertrofiran, na trenutke ironičan i dramski pretjeran, emotivno nabijen i prepun općih mjesta te koreografski
namjerice siromašan i u gestama nedovoljno sofisticiran,
prilagođen tematskom kontekstu predstave. A taj tematski
kontekst, iako je zapravo tek poligon za estetski eksperiment,
protagonisticu stavlja u svima lako čitljiv i prepoznatljiv narativ
melodrame, u ovom slučaju kopirane i kolažirane iz nekoliko
Almodóvarovih filmova. Konačan je rezultat takva kolažiranja
fragment pripovijesti (iz nama nepoznatih razloga) emotivno
povrijeđene i napuštene žene u ljubavnom brodolomu koja
balansira između nekoliko jednostavnih, ali uvijek pretjerano
izraženih emotivnih stanja i postupaka – depresivna je, sklona
alkoholu, samosažaljenju, osveti, zavođenju i histeriji. I zato
je i sam projekt Sola teško kategorizirati kao suvremeni ples,
osobito ako smo suglasni s Laurence Louppe koja tvrdi da
„za razliku od drugih umjetnosti, plesač ne raspolaže nekim
44 _ Kretanja 23 | 24
unaprijed zadanim medijem“.3 Sola, izvedbeno govoreći, leži
negdje na margini – ona je hibrid plesnog teatra, dramskog
hommagea i performansa koji jednostavno uzima dramskoizvedbenu sekvenciju i pokušava je u ime estetskog eksperimenta, koji se bavi ulogom kiča u umjetnosti, iscrpsti do
maksimuma.
Pa tako jedan od koreografskih postupaka kojima se služi
Zrinka Lukčec Kiko jest i iscrpljivanje repeticijom. Dok stalno iznova slušamo istu melodiju španjolske ljubavne pjesme
te dok se njezin trivijalni sadržaj preveden na hrvatski jezik
projicira na sceni: „Želim da patiš koliko ja patim i naučit ću
moliti da to postignem, želim da se osjećaš beskorisnim, kao
čaša bez viskija u rukama”, Lukčec nekoliko puta prilazi kartonskoj figuri muškarca te joj nudi čašu šampanjca. Budući
da je riječ o beživotnoj kartonskoj masi bez ekstremiteta ili
osjećaja, čaša svaki put pada na pod, podcrtavajući stihove u pozadini te generirajući neki uvrnuti osjećaj samoće i
nesposobnosti komunikacije za kojim protagonistica žudi.
Izvođačica potom ponovno diže čašu te ju nanovo nudi istoj
figuri, ponavljajući postupak još nekoliko puta, dovodeći
situaciju do apsurda i uništavajući dodatno originalni, na samom početku ionako već pomalo ironiziran almodovarovski
melodramatičan kontekst.
No, usprkos kodu predstave kojim Gatica i Lukčec jasno
daju do znanja da im je interes uglavnom usmjeren na istraživanje postupaka i estetskih kategorija, teško je ne opaziti
minimalističke narativne poruke smještene unutar izvedbe,
koje su ponajprije vezane uz fasciniranost Renate Carole
Gatice pop-kulturom i utjecajem koji masovni mediji imaju
na današnjeg pojedinca. Televizor na sceni (inače lajtmotiv
gotovo svake njezine predstave) na kojem se vrte scene iz
Almodóvarovih filmova nije tek uputa za upotrebu ili komplet prve pomoći za glupu publiku kojoj treba dekodiranje
tematskih fokusa izvedbe. Televizor je partner u igri, netko s
kim Zrinka Lukčec stalno komunicira, s kojim ostvaruje fizički
dodir, koji joj čak postaje nekim izvorom opsesije i suptilna
fetišizma. Protagonistica je uvučena u imaginarni (ili, još bolje
– sapuničasti) svijet koji joj on nudi, ne definirajući publici je li
ona dio njega ili tek ima želju to biti. Ponavlja citate i melodije
koje dolaze iz njega i potom ponovno i ponovno odrađuje
radnje koje su se već dogodile unutar malog ekrana. Duboko
gleda u njega, kao hipnotizirana, emotivno se involvirajući u
filmske materijale o ljubavnoj prevari, strasti i osveti, gotovo
kao da želi fizički ući u televizor. Indoktrinirana sadržajem iz
malog ekrana, uzima pištolj i odlazi ponovno do svog kartonskog ljubavnog interesa, koji potom pokušava ustrijeliti,
dok istodobno usnama sinkronizira novu pozadinsku pjesmu
melodramatična sadržaja.
3
Laurence Louppe, Poetika suvremenog plesa, prevela Jelena
Rajak, Hrvatski centar ITI, Zagreb, 2009, str. 255.
predstava: Sola Prenaglašene tjelesne geste pritom djeluju kao pomalo devijantna kopija likova femme fatale iz noir-filmova četrdesetih
i pedesetih godina prošlog stoljeća, koje su rezultat trenutka
pretjerane emotivne obuzetosti i patosa. Nemoći i gubitka
kontrole nad vlastitim tijelom. Nakon što je anulirala kartonski
ljubavni objekt, protagonistica potpuno gubi kontrolu pa puca
u televizor, u cvijeće, pa na kraju i u samu publiku, ispuštajući
pritom karikirane i pomalo humoristične histerične krikove. A
potom odustaje, kao da je zadovoljna jer je uspjela potrošiti sav
gnjev. No njezina trenutačna iscrpljenost nije samo dramska
ili fikcionalna. Ona je jasan označitelj kraja jedne dramaturške
cjeline – dok protagonistica stoji i blijedo gleda u publiku, balon
u kojem je kič egzistirao kao da se ponešto ispuhao, kao da
je potrošen i iskorišten za potrebe ove predstave. Gotovo da
funkcionira kao minijaturna kritika jedne estetske kategorije.
U pozadini simbolično ostaje samo glas jedne od glumica iz
Visokih peta, u kojima protagonistica Rebecca priznaje javno
na televiziji da je zapravo ona ta koja je ubila Manuela.
Glazbena pozadina mijenja se u prepoznatljivu pjesmu
Ne me quitte pas Jacquesa Brela, a atmosfera predstave bitno mijenja smjer, pa čak i pojedine dramaturško-estetičke
odrednice. Dotad većinom dramski momenti posustaju pred
sekvencijama koje su tjelesno dinamičnije i kompleksnije koreografirane. Pa iako generalna, glavna dramaturška linija
uspijeva održati kontinuitet, sama izvođačica kao da se pokušava više ili manje uspješno izmaknuti kiču koji je dotad
vladao njezinim izvedbenim okvirom.
Kvaliteta pokreta postaje mnogo fluidnijom i, iako još na
trenutke koketira s dramskim, polako se prelijeva u teže čitljivu
apstrakciju. Pretposljednja scena oduševljenja protagonistice
i njezina stilizirana igra zavođenja s izreskom kartonskog lika
muškarca gravitira pomalo prema iskazu sreće, pomalo prema strahu, iako su i jedan i drugi iskaz prožeti elementima
histerije koja stvara okidač za koreografiranu sekvenciju u
kojoj drhtanje tijela kao naprosto dramski moment određena
psihološkog stanja spontano postaje početkom dinamična i
emotivno veselo obojena plesa, koji Lukčec kopira iz filmske
scene na televiziji i u čijoj joj dinamičnosti spada s glave perika
koju je nosila tijekom cijele predstave – možda kao konačni
dokaz i iskaz perpetuirane fikcije u koju je bila involvirana.
Pa iako nekoliko puta pokušava vratiti periku na glavu, zbog
dinamike kretanja to ne uspijeva, kao što ni repetirana plesna sekvencija na izrazito ekspresivnu glazbu, koja se djelomično događa i u dotad zapostavljenu neutralnom prostoru
iza zastora načinjena od traka, ne uspijeva održati dramsku
koherentnost. Kič je glavni nositelj izvedbe, a opet puca po
šavovima vlastite logike. Njegovo prelijevanje preko rubova,
minimalan izvedbeni komentar o pretjeranosti i hipertrofiranosti toga što se imitira na sceni dovodi do osvještavanja
njegove prisutnosti.
Na nju se nadovezuje mnogo apstraktnija tjelesna sekvencija u kojoj izvođačica buši dotad nasumce raspoređene balone po pozornici, uz pozadinu filmskog monologa koji ponovno
govori o ubojstvu jednog od likova iz Almodóvarova filma.
Čini se kao da Sola, među ostalim, istražuje, ali istodobno pokušava i sabotirati ideju koja u suvremenim, a osobito
onim hibridnim ili multidisciplinarnim izvedbenim praksama
može također sadržavati elemente kiča, a to je ideja o snažnoj
reprezentaciji izvođača na sceni, prisutnosti koja potvrđuje glumca, izvođača ili plesača kao karizmatika, izvedbeno
snažna i puna dramskog naboja, ili nekoga tko je sposoban
u laboratorijskim uvjetima proizvesti snažan emotivan dojam
na sebe i na publiku.
Bilo bi potpuno pogrešno zaključiti da Renata Carola Gatica i Zrinka Lukčec odbacuju kič kao nešto loše i nepoželjno
u stvaranju izvedbenog djela i da žele iz svega viđenog na
sceni signalizirati nekakav suptilni manifest – nipošto. Na kraju
krajeva obje, a osobito Gatica kojoj je on jedan od stalnih
interesa, crpu nadahnuće i posuđuju i obrađuju građu koja na
kraju sasvim sigurno upada u kategoriju kiča. Tek unutar kiča
Sola pronalazi slobodu poigravati se s njegovim izvedbenim
prednostima i nedostacima.
razgovor: Zrinka Lukčec Kiko
razgovor: Zrinka Lukčec Kiko < Sola, Foto: Luka Pešun >
VEDRANA KLEPICA
Unutarnja
ispunjenost
plesom
Razgovor sa
Zrinkom Lukčec Kiko
S
amostalna plesna umjetnica, dugogodišnja članica
Zagrebačkog plesnog ansambla (od 1993. do 2012),
surađivala je s mnogim domaćim i stranim pedagozima, koreografima i redateljima: Juanom Carlosom Garcíjom,
Ksenijom Zec, Bebetom Cidrom, Katjom Šimunić, Silvijom
Both, Liz King, Snježanom Abramović Milković, Kilinom Cremonom, Irmom Omerzo, Martinom Sonderkampom, Emiliom
Gutiérrezom, Alexisom Eupierreom, Francescom Scavettom,
Natalijom Manojlović, Boom Madvigom, Tedom Stofferom,
Laurom Aris Alvarez, Renatom Carolom Gaticom. Dobitnica
je Nagrade hrvatskoga glumišta u kategoriji umjetničkoga
ostvarenja u plesu u sezoni 2003/2004. za žensku ulogu u
predstavama Isto (koreografkinje Ksenije Zec), Meni ti to nije
baš (koreografkinje Irme Omerzo) i Nešto, možda, sasvim
osobno (koreografkinje Snježane Abramović Milković).
¬
Koji su bili tvoji plesni počeci?
Kad sam bila klinka, išla sam na ritmiku, s četiri ili pet godina, ali mi se nije svidjelo, jer je teta koja ju je vodila lupala
štapićima, dakle nije bilo glazbe, pa sam izašla van. Rekla sam
da ću se vratiti kad bude glazbe. U osnovnoj školi nastavila
sam ići na raznorazne satove ritmike, gitare, pjevanja. Svašta
zapravo. A u jednome razdoblju počela sam se baviti gimnastikom. I cijelu srednju školu išla na različite tečajeve plesa,
primjerice jazz dancea... Mislim, zapravo sam oduvijek bila
neki, kako se to kaže – plesni entuzijast. No tek sam negdje
potkraj srednje škole donijela odluku da bih se htjela time
profesionalno baviti. Onda me prijateljica povela za ruku u
Zagrebački plesni ansambl (ZPA), u kojem su tada radionice
vodile članice ansambla, poput Jasminke Neufeld-Imrović
koja je vodila treninge tehnike Graham i afro-plesa, točnije
West African rhythm, potom su vanjski suradnici, balerine i
baletani iz zagrebačkoga Hrvatskog narodnog kazališta držali
treninge klasičnoga baleta, poput Ljiljane Gvozdenović, Andreja Črepinka ili Viktorije Slamnik, koja je poslije bila stalna
baletna pedagoginja ZPA-a. Upisala sam se na sve što je tada u
sklopu ZPA-ovih radionica postojalo: afro, balet, koreografske
radionice, radionice improvizacije itd.
¬ Koji su najsnažniji pedagoški utjecaji za vrijeme toga
razdoblja istraživanja i edukacije u ZPA-u?
Radionice u ZPA-u intenzivno sam polazila sigurno godinu dana. Nakon toga odmah su me uzeli u ansambl. Sve se
dogodilo dosta brzo. A u tome ranom periodu radila sam s
mnogo pedagoga. Balet sam radila jer sam ga morala raditi,
mislim, to je vještina koja zaslužuje poštovanje i divljenje, ali
ga unutar svoga tijela nisam osjetila kao nešto što želim dalje
istraživati, usavršavati se u tome smjeru. Juan Carlos García,
koreograf iz Barcelone, bio je nekako moj prvi pravi kontakt
sa suvremenim plesom, onim koji uključuje rad na podu, rad
na središtu tijela, prostorne smjerove... i koji je čak uključivao
i tehnike body-mind centering i Klein. Odmah sam to pre-
poznala kao svoj način kretanja, kao nešto što je odgovaralo
mome tijelu. Održao je jednu radionicu u Zagrebu, a potom je
nas nekoliko pozvao da dođemo na sljedeću njegovu radionicu
u Berlin, iz toga se razvio i projekt s njim. Riječ je o predstavi
Prepoznavanje krajolika1, premijerno izvedenoj 1996. u Zagrebačkom kazalištu mladih, a u ZPA-ovoj produkciji. Slična
situacija kao s Garcíjom dogodila se dvije godine poslije i s
brazilskim koreografom Bebetom Cidrom, s kojim smo u ZPA-u
radili predstavu Lovci čežnje2. Jedan je od mojih velikih učitelja
i Martin Sonderkamp, koji je došao iz Amsterdama iz Škole za
razvoj novog plesa (School voor Nieuwe Dansontwikkeling)
i držao radionice. To se sve dogodilo u vrlo kratku i intenzivnu razdoblju i ostavilo poprilično jak dojam na mene. Ali
treba svakako istaknuti da sam još prije svega toga gledala
predstavu Trishe Brown na Tjednu suvremenog plesa 3 i to je
zaista presudno utjecalo na mene, vidjela sam nešto na sceni
s čime bih se htjela baviti, način na koji bih se htjela kretati.
¬ Što si željela na početku svoga obrazovanja kao plesačica
i koliko se to promijenilo u odnosu na to što želiš danas?
Naravno da mi se percepcija nakon godina iskustva bitno
promijenila, to je nekakva osobna evolucija. Na početku sam
bila fascinirana samim time što suvremeni ples podrazumijeva
novu dimenziju i novi pristup sagledavanja tijela i prostora,
tretiranja pokreta, što uključuje razne utjecaje, primjerice iz
joge ili borilačkih vještina, što uključuje i različite sadržaje iz
književnosti, likovne umjetnosti, glazbene umjetnosti, što
također može uključivati teme s područja znanosti, socijalne
teme, i političke teme na kraju krajeva. Suvremeni ples činio
mi se od samoga početka kao savršen poligon za izražavanje
vlastitih stavova, vlastitih mišljenja – od osobnih, emotivnih do
obuhvatnijih, društvenih. A danas mi je i dalje jako dragocjeno
stjecanje nekih novih znanja. Suvremeni ples nešto je što se
1
Prepoznavanje krajolika, plesna predstava u koprodukciji
Zagrebačkog plesnog ansambla, katalonskog ansambla Lanònime
Imperial i Zagrebačkog kazališta mladih. Premijera: prosinac 1996,
ZKM. Koreograf: Juan Carlos García; plesači: Snježana Abramović
Milković, Laura Aris, Branko Banković, Viviane Calvitti, Bebeto Cidra, Ivančica Horvat, Fernando Hurtado, Ricardo Iazzeta, Blaženka
Kovač Carić, Nathalie Labiano, Zrinka Lukčec Kiko. Glumci: Vjekoslav Janković, Vilim Matula; kostimograf: Neus Ferrer; oblikovatelj
rasvjete: Mingo Albir; glazbeni suradnik: Zlatko Madžar.
2
Lovci čežnje, plesna predstava nastala u koprodukciji Zagrebačkog plesnog ansambla, Zagrebačkog kazališta mladih i Istarskog
narodnog kazališta – Gradskog kazališta Pula. Praizvedba: studeni
1998, INK GK Pula. Premijera: veljača 1999, ZKM. Koreograf:
Bebeto Cidra; plesačice: Snježana Abramović Milković, Nikolina Pristaš, Tamara Curić, Hilari Kos, Zrinka Lukčec Kiko, Andreja Široki;
dramaturg: Goran Sergej Pristaš; scenografi: Bebeto Cidra, Marina
Štembergar; kostimografkinja: Marina Štembergar; oblikovatelj rasvjete: Aleksandar Mondecar; glazbena montaža: Xavier Maristany.
3
Sedmi Tjedan suvremenog plesa (1990), Zagrebačko kazalište
mladih, gostovanje skupine Trishe Brown s koreografijama: Lateral
Pass, Opal Loop i Astral Convertible.
48 _ Kretanja 23 | 24
konstantno razvija i u tome je njegova ljepota i vrijednost.
Tada na početku nisam imala strogo zacrtane ciljeve. Kad sam
se u nečemu prepoznala, išla sam za tim. Ali u tom početnom
periodu istraživala sam sebe kao plesačicu. Možda se najviše
promijenilo to što kao mlada plesačica u ansamblu radiš i stvari
koje te zanimaju i stvari koje te malo manje zanimaju – ali
to nije loše jer dobiješ široki spektar znanja i iskustva. Sada,
godinama poslije, kad radim vlastite projekte, normalno je da
se mogu posvetiti isključivo stvarima koje me zanimaju, što je
divno. Ali možda je divno upravo zato što sam dosad prošla
kroz niz projekata i naučila mnogo iz njih.
¬ Mnogi plesači danas rade kao pedagozi. I sama vodiš
plesne radionice. Misliš li da svaki plesač može biti i pedagog, odnosno što je potrebno za pedagoški rad?
Sam je pedagoški rad i provjera koliko je to naše znanje o
plesu osviješteno. To se vidi u onom trenutku kad to znanje
trebaš nekom prenijeti. Odlično je raditi s različitim pedagozima jer nemaju svi jednake upute – imaju drukčije pristupe,
alate. Katkad neku uputu ne prepoznajemo, a ako je stavimo
u drugi kontekst ili oblik, bit će nam okidač za stvaranje novih
stvari. Meni je lijepo prenositi znanje drugima. Pogotovo kad
to ljudi prepoznaju kao umijeće koje mogu propuštati kroz
vlastita tijela i usvajati ga njima. Neobično je važan aspekt
vlastita iskustva: da se nešto može upoznati svojim tijelom.
To značajno mijenja percepciju, kad se stvari izmaknu iz teorijske ravni i kad tijelo ostvaruje vlastito iskustvo, vlastitom
inteligencijom. Često se nečega ne možemo sjetiti u glavi, ali
tijelo pamti i to je ta tjelesna inteligencija na djelu. No još se
borimo za to da se plesni pedagoški rad shvati kao ozbiljan
posao, jer kao da nije prihvaćen do kraja. Imam osjećaj da
još postoje tragovi neznanja i predrasuda o našoj profesiji – u
smislu pleše, i još je plaćena za to. Katkad se takav općenit
doživljaj plesa prenosi i na pedagoški rad.
¬
Kako su izgledali tvoji profesionalni počeci?
Dakle, ja sam, kao što sam već spomenula, veoma brzo
nakon polaženja radionica u ZPA-u ušla u ansambl. Njega je
tada već vodila Snježana Abramović Milković. Prve predstave
radila sam s Katjom Šimunić, Ksenijom Zec, Juanom Carlosom
Garcíjom, Kilinom Cremonom, Martinom Sonderkampom. U
tome trenutku bila sam sretna sa spektrom znanja ljudi s kojima sam radila. Također, s njihovom kreativnošću, ljubavlju,
strašću prema plesu i kazalištu. Osim toga ansambl je svake
godine pozivao na suradnju strane pedagoge i koreografe,
a to je ujedno i nama iz ansambla značilo daljnji razvoj i
obrazovanje, stvaranje novih kontakata. Otvaranje mogućnosti za nove projekte. U svakom slučaju to je bilo iznimno
pozitivno iskustvo. ZPA je uvijek bio vrlo profesionalan i sam
rad ansambla bio je na vrlo visokoj razini, što uključuje svakodnevne plesne treninge nakon kojih slijede probe. Dakle,
razgovor: Zrinka Lukčec Kiko mogu reći da sam svakodnevno i po cijele dane provodila
vrijeme u dvorani.
¬ Tijekom karijere radila si s mnogim hrvatskim i stranim
koreografima. Možeš li izdvojiti svoja najdraža iskustva i
objasniti zašto su bila posebna?
Bez obzira na veliki broj koreografa s kojima sam radila
tijekom devetnaest godina u ZPA-u, teško mi je izdvojiti baš
posebnog favorita. Mislim da je velika dragocjenost plesa
kao profesije što svaki koreograf nosi novo iskustvo, neku
novu energiju. Svakog zanimaju različite teme. Što podrazumijeva istraživanje na različitim poljima izvedbenih umjetnosti. S nekakva početka karijere to su predstave Sub rosa4
Katje Šimunić i Tango je tužna misao koja se pleše 5 Ksenije
Zec. Poslije, meni su jako drage predstave Isto 6 , ponovno
u koreografiji Ksenije Zec, Nešto možda sasvim osobno 7 i
Ogoljeno 8 Snježane Abramović Milković, Meni ti to nije baš 9
4
Sub rosa, plesna predstava u produkciji Zagrebačkog plesnog
ansambla. Premijera: 1994. u Zagrebačkom kazalištu mladih. Koreografkinja: Katja Šimunić; plesačice: Blaženka Kovač Carić, Snježana
Abramović Milković, Zrinka Lukčec Kiko, Andreja Široki, Ljiljana
Zagorac; scenografija: Nikola Šimunić; kostimografija: Sunčica
Mraković; rasvjeta: Olivije Marečić; glazba: Dora Pejačević, Gudački
kvartet u C-duru, op. 58.
5
Tango je tužna misao koja se pleše, plesna predstava u produkciji
Zagrebačkog plesnog ansambla. Premijera: 3. travnja 1995. u Zagrebačkom kazalištu mladih. Koreografkinja: Ksenija Zec; plesači/
glumci: Snježana Abramović Milković, Blaženka Kovač Carić, Zrinka Lukčec Kiko, Hilari Kos, Pravdan Devlahović, Rene Bitorajac i
Kristijan Ugrina. Scenografkinja i kostimografkinja: Clara d‘Hubert.
Dramaturginja: Sanja Ivić. Glazba: Tomas Krkač.
6
Isto, plesna predstava u produkciji Zagrebačkog plesnog ansambla u suradnji s Teatrom &TD. Premijera: 29. svibnja 2004. u Teatru
&TD u Zagrebu. Koreografija: Ksenija Zec; plesačice: Snježana
Abramović Milković, Darija Doždor, Zrinka Lukčec Kiko, Almira
Osmanović; dramaturgija: Saša Božić; glazba i izbor glazbe: Damir
Šimunović; scena: Igor Pauška; kostimografija: Đenisa Pecotić;
oblikovanje rasvjete: Branko Cvjetičanin.
7
Nešto, možda, sasvim osobno, plesna predstava u produkciji
Zagrebačkog plesnog ansambla u suradnji s Teatrom &TD. Premijera: 29. studenoga 2003. u Teatru &TD. Koreografija: Snježana
Abramović Milković; plesači: Darija Doždor, Ana Kreitmayer,
Zrinka Lukčec Kiko, Andreja Široki, Branko Banković, Ognjen Vučinić; dramaturgija: Saša Božić; scena i oblikovanje rasvjete: Branko
Cvjetičanin; kostimografija: Dženisa Pecotić; glazba: Hrvoje Nikšić i
Sven Pavlović; video: Mak Vejzović i Hrvoje Franjić.
8
Ogoljeno, plesna predstava u produkciji Zagrebačkog plesnog
ansambla. Premijera: 6. listopada 2007. u Zagrebačkom kazalištu
mladih. Koreografkinja: Snježana Abramović Milković; plesači:
Ognjen Vučinić, Zrinka Lukčec Kiko, Gregor Luštek, Sara Barbieri,
Andreja Široki / Martina Tomić, Arnulfo Pardo, Tomislav Kvartuč,
Nikola Orešković; dramaturg: Saša Božić; glazba: Damir Šimunović; glazbeni suradnik za operu: Zlatko Madžar; kostimografkinja:
Dženisa Pecotić; rasvjeta: Branko Cvjetičanin.
9
Meni ti to nije baš..., plesna predstava u produkciji Zagrebačkog
plesnog ansambla u suradnji s Kazalištem Trešnja. Premijera: 11.
siječnja 2003. u Kazalištu Trešnja u Zagrebu. Koreografija: Irma
Omerzo; plesači: Andreja Široki, Darija Doždor, Ognjen Vučinić,
Irme Omerzo. Potom bih svakako izdvojila već spomenutu
predstavu Lovci čežnje Bebeta Cidre. Od još recentnijih Perači
prozora10 u režiji Natalije Manojlović.
¬ Koja je razlika između rada u velikom ansamblu poput
ZPA-a i rada na manjim projektima?
Kad si u ansamblu koji okuplja veći broj ljudi, normalno
je da nemaš takvu slobodu kao što imaš kad radiš svoj projekt, od biranja teme, koreografije itd. No jednako tako rad
u grupi nudi odličan osjećaj pri čemu se rađa grupna energija
koja teži nekom zajedničkom cilju. Prolaženje cijelog procesa i poslije, naravno, izvođenje predstave na sceni. Lijepo
je kad ljudi zajedno dišu. Jednako tako drugi nam izvođači
mogu biti nadahnuće, jer svi učimo jedni od drugih. Takva
vrsta zajedničke energije na poseban se način manifestira
na sceni. Kad si sam u dvorani, zapravo je nužna veća doza
samodiscipline. U grupnom procesu svi smo nekako jedni
drugima pokretači.
¬ Što te najviše smeta u suradnjama i koji su za tebe najveći problemi između koreografa i plesača?
Iskreno, ne volim kad izostane poštovanje i povjerenje.
Dakle, kad se u samome pristupu osjeti prevelika autoritarnost koreografa. Takva autoritarna energija nije protočna.
To je nekakva jednosmjerna cesta i blokira kreativni rad.
Nasuprot tome, lijepo je prepoznati veliko znanje kod ljudi
i vidjeti da ga prenose uvažavajući druge. Iznimno cijenim
učitelje, svejedno bili oni plesni pedagozi ili koreografi,
koji na temelju svoga znanja ne iskazuju nikakvu nadmoć
i ne demonstriraju silu, nego znanje prenose s ljubavlju.
Ples je na svaki način tjelesna manifestacija, a ujedno je
ljubav koja zrači i to ljudi osjete. U posljednje vrijeme jako
sam voljela raditi s Boom Madvigom i Tedom Stofferom.
Danski je plesni umjetnik Bo Madvig na poziv ZPA-a 2012.
vodio radionicu improvizacija koje pružaju alate i vještine
za kretanje, usmjeravanje trenutka svoga osobnog pokreta,
osvještavanje vremena, predosjećanje dolaska. Da bismo se
mogli izražavati samostalno, a i u skupini, i tako razvijati i
ojačati osobni izvođački vokabular. Da budemo dio skupine,
a opet da ne gubimo osobnost. A američki plesni umjetnik
s belgijskom adresom Ted Stoffer na poziv je Studija za
suvremeni ples 2013. vodio dvotjednu radionicu o stvara-
Pravdan Devlahović, Roberta Milevoj, Zrinka Lukčec Kiko, Zrinka
Šimičić Mihanović; scenografija: Anastazija Debelli, glazba: Aleksandar Antić i TBF; Kostimi: Josipa i Marijana Bronić; rasvjeta:
Branko Cvjetičanin.
10 Perači prozora, predstava nastala u koprodukciji organizacije
Plešimedo, Zagrebačkog plesnog ansambla i Kulture promjene
Studentskog centra. Premijera: 20. lipnja 2012. u Teatru &TD.
Koreografkinja i redateljica: Natalija Manojlović; izvođači: Zrinka
Lukčec Kiko i Petar Cvirn; scenografija Natalija Manojlović.
nju propozicije na sceni i načinima kojima to ostvarujemo.
Dobili smo zadatke vezane uz prostor, vrijeme, artikulaciju
i tenziju. To su bile elementarne, temeljne stvari, a Stoffer
je kao temu radionice postavio pitanje ljubavi. Zadavao
nam je zadatke i podzadatke. Primjerice, glavni zadatak bio
je nekomu ili sebi iskazivati pozornost, a to se ostvarivalo
manjim zadacima, recimo, učiniti to pjevanjem ili davanjem
nekog dara ili biti jednim dijelom tijela vezan uz nekoga...
Ili, primjerice, izraziti agresiju pjevanjem pjesme... A potom
bi se nakon iscrpna rada na zadacima i podzadacima ulazilo u improvizaciju od sat vremena. Bilo mi je to iznimno
zanimljivo.
¬ Svoj posljednji projekt Sola realizirala si s redateljicom
Renatom Carolom Gaticom. Koja je razlika kad umjesto s
koreografom radiš s kazališnim redateljem?
Naravno da nije jednako raditi s koreografom i redateljem. No tijekom svoga dosadašnjeg izvođačkog iskustva
nisam bila izričito samo u plesu, educirala sam se i putem
glumačkih zadataka. Surađivala sam kao izvođačica s redateljicom Frankom Perković na predstavi Europa, zasnovanoj na tekstu Ivane Sajko, a s koreografkinjom/redateljicom
Natalijom Manojlović na predstavi Perači prozora, u kojoj
smo jedini izvođači bili akademski glumac Petar Cvirn i ja,
zatvoreni u kavez veličine tri i pol na četiri metra s podom
koji je bio krcat kikirikijem u ljusci. Ispitivali smo osjećaj zatvorenosti od krajnje inhibiranosti do ekstaze. No htjela bih
naglasiti da iako je Renata Carola Gatica kazališna redateljica,
u svoj način rada znatno uključuje pokret. Zadaci tijekom
procesa jesu bili složeni, ali uvijek su počinjali od nekog
pokreta. Primjerice, u prvoj sceni predstave Sola, s obzirom
na to da smo se bavile ženskim likovima iz Almodóvarovih
filmova koji su skloni emotivnim pretjerivanjima, treba se
dobiti dojam da sam treštena pijana. Moje se stanje možda
čita kao posvemašnje pijanstvo, ali zadatak koji sam radila
na probi rezultirao je u predstavi načinom promišljanja te
scene kao da se sa svakim izdahom s mene cijedi meso, koža,
i kao da ostaje sve manje i manje toga na mojim kostima,
sve dok ne ostanu samo gole kosti. I kako se sad te kosti
koje više nemaju mišiće kreću? Kako golim kostima uhvatiti
rekvizit – čašu? Ili napraviti bilo koji pokret? A događa se i
izravan dodir kostiju. Dakle, mnogo smo radile s disanjem.
Sve u predstavi Sola vezano je uz disanje: ili se prati disanje u pjesmi, ili je disanje nekakva elementarna stvar pa
se tome dodaje tekst i radi se na njemu kroz udah-izdah,
čemu se još dodaju emocija i pokret. Veliki naglasak je na
samome disanju. A tematski govoreći, odlučile smo se u Soli
za Almodóvara zbog njegove ekstremnosti u izražavanju i
spajanju naizgled nespojivih krajnosti kao što su smrt i strast
te eskalacija emocija. Cijela predstava vrlo je slojevita i osim
što uključuje tjelesnu razinu koja je određena kvalitetama
50 _ Kretanja 23 | 24
pokreta, uključuje emocionalnu razinu te svijest o povezanosti i nužnosti usporedna građenja i pokreta i emocije i
komunikacije, što u nekim klasičnim plesnim predstavama
nije često zastupljeno. Renata je iznimno inteligentna, pametna i intuitivna autorica te jako dobro zna što hoće, a s
druge strane ustraje na istraživanju, ostavlja dovoljno mjesta
izvođaču da bude angažiran i okupiran. Izazov je za mene
kao izvođačicu igrati predstavu koja uključuje toliko različitih
izvedbenih slojeva.
¬ Kako vidiš poziciju dramaturga u plesnim produkcijama?
Je li to nešto što je nužno?
Mislim da to stvarno ovisi o vrsti i karakteru predstave
na kojoj radiš. Posao je dramaturga da predlaže koreografu
i preispituje njegove odluke, da ga potiče na promišljanje o
odlukama koje je već donio. Svakako sam mnogo naučila
od dramaturga s kojima sam radila, osobito od Saše Božića.
Suradnja s njim otvorila mi je neke nove perspektive i mnogo
toga što sam naučila od dramaturga i sama upotrebljavam
danas u svojim predstavama.
¬ Radiš već dugo i kao koreografkinja. Što razlikuje plesača od koreografa?
Osim dobro odrađene pripreme koju svaki koreograf
treba napraviti i, naravno, razrađene teme, promišljanja o
kostimima, glazbi itd., osobno mi je lakše koreografirati ako
uđem u ulogu plesača. Jedno ovisi o drugome i međusobno
se dopunjuje. Dobro je na trenutke preuzeti i jednu i drugu
ulogu. Kad si koreograf, dobro je preuzeti ulogu plesača i
staviti se u njihovu situaciju, kao i obrnuto – kad si unutra,
svatko prolazi svoj proces. S plesne strane jako je važno da
se plesač katkad izdvoji iz cjeline, da bi se lakše sagledala
cjelokupna situacija. Koreografski rad osim što podrazumijeva drukčiju razinu odgovornosti prema kazalištu, ali
i prema ljudima s kojima radiš, daje mogućnosti da budeš
kreativan. Obično izaberem temu kojom se želim baviti,
a potom krećem u fazu istraživanja. Volim da sam način
istraživanja potiče kreativnu energiju, i za mene i za plesače s kojima radim, koja se u kasnijoj fazi kanalizira u nešto
novo, predvođena tom inicijalnom temom koju sam zadala.
Naravno, koreograf treba jasno znati što zapravo radi te tu
jasnoću treba znati komunicirati s izvođačima. A nadahnuće tražim u svemu. Svakako se služim filmom, glazbom, pa
i književnošću, ili općenito drugim granama umjetnosti, i
slikarstvom, kiparstvom… Može biti čak vezano za znanost.
Ovisi o tome što me u određenom trenutku zanima. Primjerice, u recentnome radu Sve-jedno11 istražujem kretanja
11 Sve-jedno je rezidencijalni projekt festivala Perforacije prikazan
u Zagrebačkom plesnom centru 29. lipnja 2015. Koreografkinja i
plesačica: Zrinka Lukčec Kiko.
razgovor: Zrinka Lukčec Kiko unutar kozmosa narušavanjem i uspostavljanjem ravnoteže, tjelesnost supostavljam videoelementima projiciranim
širokokutnim projektorom. Bavim se u toj koreografiji u
nastajanju, u kojoj sam jedina plesačica, funkcioniranjem atoma, njegovim raspadanjem i uspostavljanjem,
bavim se kretanjem orbita, a jedan dio plesa asocira na
levitaciju. No moram reći da je drukčija vrsta posla kad
si plesač i kad si koreograf. Ali mene još ispunjava to što
se krećem. To što sam izvođačica. Možda se to može
usporediti s tijelom koje kretanjem kao da stvara neku
ovisnost, kao da se stvara hormon sreće. I imaš potrebu
kretati se. Jer ti je tijelo sretno. Svaki put kad se kreće,
sretno je. I onda uvijek imaš želju obnavljati taj hormon
sreće i živjeti ga dalje.
Vedrana Klepica (Kutina, 1986) kazališna je dramaturginja i autorica tekstova za izvedbe. Studirala je dramaturgiju
na Akademiji dramske umjetnosti u Zagrebu. Dosad joj je izvedeno šest dramskih tekstova – u Hrvatskoj, Australiji, Velikoj
Britaniji i Njemačkoj. Kao autorica sudjelovala je na festivalu
dramskih pisaca Neue Stücke aus Europa i Internationale Autorenlabor am Theater Konstanz u Njemačkoj, studiju National
Theatrea u Londonu, konferenciji Women Playwrights International u Švedskoj, festivalima World Interplay u Australiji i
Turskoj. Pisala je o kazalištu za različite publikacije te je radila
u produkciji nekoliko kazališnih festivala. Godine 2013. prvi
je put režirala u kazalištu, vlastiti tekst Tragična smrt ekonomskog analitičara. Zajedno s producenticom Petrom Glad
2012. preuzela je vodstvo umjetničke organizacije KUFER.
performance: Sola
performance: Sola < Sola, Photo: Luka Pešun >
VEDRANA KLEPICA
A Sabotage
of Kitsch
Renata Carola Gatica and Zrinka Lukčec Kiko’s Sola
P
ositioned somewhere on the border between
dance performance and play, and looking at first
as a sort of a homage to Spanish director Pedro
Almodóvar, Sola is in fact a miniature aesthetic-performing experiment, whose main questions explore the
potency of kitsch as a ubiquitous artistic and stylistic
phenomenon. The Sola1 project, by theatre director
Renata Carola Gatica2 and dancer and choreographer
1
Sola premiered at the Zagreb Dance Center on December 4th,
2014. Director and dramaturge: Renata Carola Gatica; choreographer
and performer: Zrinka Lukčec Kiko; costume design: Patricio Alejandro
Aguero; set design: Renata Carola Gatica; translation: Nikolina Židek.
2
Renata Carola Gatica (Cordoba, Argentina, July 9 th, 1978) studied Theatre at the Faculty of Philosophy at the National University of
Cordoba (UNC). At the age of nineteen she won the opportunity to
direct her first play as a prize at the Cordoba Theatre Marathon. From
that point on, in addition to her studies, she has pursued her directorial
career. She is the founder of the La Piaf theatre troupe, in which she
worked as a director for ten years, directing more than fifteen plays,
making guest appearances at numerous festivals in Latin America.
With that troupe, she founded the SalaK culture center in 2000, where
she worked for three years as artistic director, and taught theatrical
arts to children, teenagers and others. In 2006 she received an award
for Best Young Theatre Director from the government of Cordoba.
She has been living in Zagreb since 2007, where she has staged eleven
plays in the last six years. She has collaborated with KUFER, the &TD
Theatre (Argentina, The Extravagance, Šarengrad and Hear, Hamlet,
Hear; Argentina, Ekstravagancija, Šarengrad, Čuj, Hamlete, čuj), the
Trešnja Theatre (Pippi Longstocking; Pipi Duga Čarapa), the Dubrava
Children’s Theatre (Little Children, Big People; Mala djeca, veliki ljudi), the Smješko Children’s Theatre (Love or Death; Ljubav ili smrt), the
Naranča Theatre (Pinocchio, The Snow Queen; Pinokio, Snježna kraljica), the Ivan Goran Kovačić amateur troupe (Nostalgia and The Bald
Soprano; Nostalgija, Ćelava pjevačica), the Kerempuh Satirical Theatre
Zrinka Lukčec Kiko is the first collaboration of these two
authors, and is, to an extent, something of a departure
from the performances they have previously produced,
with Gatica known for creating predominantly dramatic
plays, and Lukčec focusing on dance performances.
The minimalistic set design means that the stage is
spatially divided into two parts, separated by a plastic
curtain of sorts, crafted out of strips through which we
can see the back part of the stage, still partially hidden
from the audience and distinctly colored, which gives a
sense of depth, strangeness and almost dramatic expectation to the space of movement. The front part of the
stage contains only a TV-set; not an ancient one but, next
to the new generation of HDTV plasma screens and LED
LCDs, old enough to give off a certain vintage impression.
The only other things that attract the audience’s attention
are a bouquet of roses laid on the TV, approximately
thirty blue balloons laid out randomly on the stage, a
two-dimensional cardboard cutout of a greying man in
his fifties, several bottles of alcohol and a red chair. But,
at first glance, the set is still dominated by the verses of
a Spanish love ballad that is audible in the background.
The verses are translated, enlarged, hypertrophic and
projected onto an area covering three or four meters of
the stage. The play’s choreographer and performer, Zrinka
Lukčec Kiko, sits on a red chair, dressed in a small blue
(At the Martin’s; Kod Martinovih), the Virovitica Theatre (The Pot of
Gold; Ćup), and the Zagreb Youth Theatre (#workingtitleantigone;
#radninaslovantigona).
performance: Sola
coat with a fur collar, a red skirt, long stockings, silver
heels and wearing large sunglasses. We are not entirely
sure who she reminds us of, but her costume does fit a
certain category of an aesthetic cliché. Something we
have seen before. She seems a bit absent, even though
she is facing the audience.
From the abovementioned, it is clear that a couple
of minimal audiovisual elements are enough to communicate, even to audience members who do not possess a
vast knowledge about this particular culture, film oeuvre
or legacy, that the fictional space occupied on the stage of
the Zagreb Dance Center by director Renata Carola Gatica
in her play Sola overwhelmingly invokes the aesthetic
characteristics of the movies of Spanish movie director
Pedro Almodóvar. If one looks a bit more closely into the
rearview mirror, it is precisely that imaginary, average
connoisseur of European film who will be able to recognize Almodóvar’s famous Women on the Verge of a Nervous
Breakdown (1988) or High Heels (1991). If a certain visual
identity is easily associated with a certain name or setting
to a wider consumer audience, or at least reminds them
of a certain cultural milieu, form of artistic expression,
or a part of a certain geographic, political and/or national
framework, and especially if it is very easy to reproduce
(because it has already been reproduced many times),
then this sort of reproduction is to be characterized as –
kitsch. And kitsch is precisely the aesthetic framework of
this play, but it is also a subject to which Renata Carola
Gatica regularly returns in her productions. In her play
Šarengrad (&TD Theatre, 2011) she places it, with great
political forethought, into an imaginary war-torn town
populated only by women, whose real lives have been
replaced by the narrative of a soap-opera which they follow obsessively, mixing the fictional with the real; on the
other hand, she uses it very subtly in directing her new
play #workingtitleantigone (Zagreb Youth Theatre, 2015),
in which kitsch has a violent effect on society and comes
in the form of mass media, reproducing almost identical,
dumbed-down and simplified content for the masses.
With this project, Gatica and Lukčec pose a very simple question – what happens to a performance when
kitsch becomes the basic aesthetic category? And Sola is
exactly that: the skeleton of a play, stripped down almost
to the simplest formula – a reproduction of existing subject matter – parodied, hypertrophied, at time ironic and
over-dramatic, emotionally charged and full of clichés,
intentionally choreographically barren and unsophisticated in its gesticulation, and adapted to the thematic
context of the performance. And that thematic context,
even though it is in fact only a platform for an aesthetic
experiment, places the protagonist in a readily apparent
54 _ Kretanja 23 | 24
and recognizable narrative of a melodrama, in this case
copied and collaged from several of Almodóvar’s movies.
The final result of this sort of a collage is a fragment of
a tale of a – for reasons unknown to us – emotionally
wounded and abandoned woman experiencing the breakdown of a romantic relationship, and balancing between
several simple, but always overblown emotional states
and actions – she is depressed and prone to drinking,
self-pity, vengeance, seduction and hysteria. Because of
this, the Sola project itself is hard to characterize as contemporary dance, especially if we agree with Laurence
Louppe’s claim that “unlike other arts, a dancer is never
given a predetermined medium”.3 Sola, from a performing perspective, exists somewhere on the margins – it
is a hybrid of dance theatre, a dramatic homage and a
performance which simply takes a dramatic-performance
sequence and tries to exhaust it to its limits, in the name
of an aesthetic experiment on the role of kitsch in art.
In that way, one of the choreographic methods used
by Zrinka Lukčec Kiko is the act of exhaustion through
repetition. As we listen, again and again, to the same
melody of a Spanish love song, and as its trivial meaning
is translated and projected onto the stage: “I want you to
suffer as much as I do and I will learn to pray to achieve
it, I want to make you feel useless, like a glass without
whisky in your hand,” Lukčec approaches the cardboard
cutout of a man, offering it a glass of champagne. As it
is a lifeless cardboard mass without limbs or feelings,
the glass drops to the floor every time, underscoring
the lyrics in the background and creating a twisted feeling of solitude and inability to communicate, which the
protagonist yearns for. The protagonist then picks up
the glass once again and offers it to the same cardboard
figure, repeating this several times and bringing the
situation into the realm of the absurd, thereby further
dismantling the original, initially already ironic almodovarian melodramatic context. But, despite the code of
the performance, which Gatica and Lukčec use to clearly
indicate that their interest is mainly aimed at exploring
methods and aesthetic categories, it is hard not to notice
the minimalist narrative messages placed in the performance, which are primarily tied to the fascination Renata
Carola Gatica has with pop-culture and the influence of
mass media on the contemporary individual. The TV set
on stage (which is a leitmotif of almost every staging of
hers) which plays scenes from Almodóvar’s movies is
not merely a users’ manual or a first-aid kit for a dumb
audience which needs to have the performance’s thematic foci decoded for them. The TV is a partner in this
3
Laurence Louppe, Poetics of Contemporay Dance.
performance: Sola game, someone with whom Zrinka Lukčec constantly
communicates and realizes physical contact, and who
even becomes a source of obsession and subtle fetishism.
The protagonist is drawn into an imaginary (or, more
accurately, soap-opera) world which the TV offers her,
without defining to the audience whether she is a part of
that world or merely wishes to be. She repeats quotes and
melodies that come from within it, and repeats actions
that have already happened on the small screen. She
looks deep within it, as if hypnotized, getting emotionally
involved in the movie stories about infidelity, passion
and revenge, almost as if she wants to physically crawl
into the television set. Indoctrinated by the content from
the screen, she takes a gun and goes to her cardboard
love interest once again, attempting to shoot him, while
lip-syncing to a new melodramatic background song.
Her exaggerated physical gestures resemble a somewhat deviant copy of the femme fatale characters from the
noir movies of 1940s and 1950s, and they are a result of a
moment of excessive emotional involvement and pathos,
powerlessness and a loss of control over her body. After
annulling the cardboard love interest, the protagonist
completely loses control and shoots the television, the
flowers, and finally the audience, all the while making
exaggerated and even somewhat comical hysterical noises. And then she gives up, as if she is glad that she has
managed to release all her anger. But her exhaustion was
not just dramatic or fictional. It is a clear signifier of the
end of a dramaturgic whole – as the protagonists stands
staring blankly at the audience, the balloon in which
kitsch existed seems to deflate, as if it has been used up
for the performance. It almost functions as a miniature
critique of an aesthetic category. Symbolically, only the
voice of one of the actresses from High Heels remains in
the background – the protagonist Rebecca’s televised
public admission that it was she who killed Manuel.
The background music shifts into Jacques Brel’s familiar
tune Ne me quitte pas, and the atmosphere of the play
takes a sharp turn, even in its dramatic and aesthetic
components. Previously mainly dramatic moments give
way to sequences which are more physically dynamic
and choreographed with more complexity. Even though
the main general dramaturgic line manages to maintain
its continuity, the performer herself seems to be trying
(with varying degrees of success) to evade the kitsch
that had previously been prevalent over her performing
framework. The quality of movement becomes more
fluid and, even though it still flirts with dramatic text,
it slowly morphs into a less decipherable abstraction.
The penultimate scene of the protagonist’s exhilaration
and her stylized game of seduction with the cardboard
cutout man gravitates partially towards happiness, partially towards fear, although both of these expressions
are intertwined with moments of hysteria which creates
a trigger for a choreographed sequence in which the
trembling of a body, as a purely dramatic moment of a
psychological state, spontaneously becomes the beginning
of a dynamic and emotionally joyful dance, which Lukčec
copies from the film scene on the television. In the midst
of its dynamism, the wig that the protagonist has been
wearing throughout the performance slips off, perhaps
as a final proof and evidence of the perpetuated fiction
it had been a part of. Thus, even though she tries several
times to put the wig back on her head, the dynamics of
her movement prevent her from doing so, just like the
repeating dance sequence, set to extremely expressive
music, fails to maintain dramatic coherence, set as it is in
the previously neglected neutral space behind the strip
curtain. Kitsch is the cornerstone of the performance,
and yet it rips at the seams of its own logic. The fact that
it spills over, as a minimal performative commentary
about the overblown and hypertrophied nature of that
which is being imitated on stage, leads to an awareness
of its presence.
Tying on to it is a much more abstract physical
sequence in which the performer pops the randomly
laid out balloons on the stage, to the backdrop of a movie
monologue, once again describing the murder of yet
another character from an Almodóvar movie.
It seems that Sola, among other things, explores
and, at the same time, tries to sabotage an idea which in
contemporary performance practices, especially hybrid
or multi-disciplinary ones, can also contain elements
of kitsch, which is the idea of a strong representation
of performers on the stage, a presence which affirms
the actor, performer or dancer as a charismatic icon,
simultaneously strong and full of dramatic charge, or
someone who is capable of producing, in laboratory
conditions, a strong emotional effect on themselves
and the audience.
It would be completely wrong to come to the conclusion that Renata Carola Gatica and Zrinka Lukčec reject
kitsch as something bad and unwelcome in the creation
of a performance piece, and that everything that took
place on the stage was a signal of some subtle manifest
– not at all. In the end, both of them, and especially
Gatica who considers kitsch to be one of her constant
interests, draw inspiration, borrow and interpret subject
matter which, ultimately, most certainly belongs within
the sphere of kitsch. It is only within the realm of kitsch
that Sola finds the freedom to play with its performative
advantages and disadvantages.
interview: Zrinka Lukčec Kiko
interview: Zrinka Lukčec Kiko < Sola, Photo: Luka Pešun >
VEDRANA KLEPICA
An Inner
Fulfilment
through Dance
A conversation with
Zrinka Lukčec Kiko
A
n independent dance artist and long-time member of the Zagreb Dance Company (from 1993
to 2012), Zrinka Lukčec Kiko has collaborated
with many domestic and foreign pedagogues, choreographers and directors: Juan Carlos García, Ksenija Zec,
Bebeto Cidra, Katja Šimunić, Silvia Both, Liz King, Snježana Abramović Milković, Kilina Cremona, Irma Omerzo,
Martin Sonderkamp, Emilio Gutiérrez, Alexis Eupierre,
Francesco Scavetta, Natalija Manojlović, Bo Madvig, Ted
Stoffer, Laura Aris Alvarez, Renata Carola Gatica. She
won the Croatian Theatrical Award in the Artistic Dance
Achievement for the 2003/2004 season for the lead
female role in the plays The Same (Isto) choreographed by
Ksenija Zec, This is Not My Cup of Tea (Meni ti to nije baš)
choreographed by Irma Omerzo, and Something, Maybe
Personal (Nešto, možda, sasvim osobno) choreographed by
Snježana Abramović Milković.
¬ How did you get into dance?
When I was a kid, I took rhythmic dance classes,
when I was four or five, but I didn’t like it, because the
teacher would only use sticks for rhythm – there was
no music, so I just left. I said I would come back when
they played music. In elementary school, I had to take
various lessons in rhythmic dance, guitar, singing… a
whole lot of things, really. In one phase, I started doing
gymnastics. Throughout high-school, I took various dance
courses, such as jazz dance… I think I have always been a
sort of dance enthusiast, if you will. But it was only near
the end of high-school that I decided that I would like
to do it professionally. So a friend took me by the hand
and led me to the Zagreb Dance Company (ZPA), where
workshops were held by Company members, such as Jasminka Neufeld-Imrović, who taught classes in the Graham
technique and in afro dance; West African rhythm to be
precise. You also had expert associates, ballet dancers
from the Croatian National Theatre in Zagreb, who taught
classes in classical ballet – among others, Ljiljana Gvozdenović, Andrej Črepinko and Viktorija Slamnik, who later
became the permanent house ballet pedagogue of the
ZPA. I enrolled in every workshop on offer at the ZPA
at the time: afro dance, ballet, choreography workshops,
improvisation workshops etc.
¬ What were your most important pedagogic influences during that time of exploration and education
at the ZPA?
I participated in the ZPA’s workshops intensively for
a year, at least. After that, I was immediately accepted
into the Company. It all happened pretty fast. In that
early period I worked with many pedagogues. I practiced
ballet because I had to; I mean, it’s a skill that is worthy
of respect and admiration, but I didn’t feel it in my body
as something I wanted to keep exploring or perfecting
myself in that direction.
Juan Carlos García, a choreographer from Barcelona,
gave me my first contact with contemporary dance, of the
sort that included work on the floor, work on the center
of the body, space and directions… it even included the
body-mind centering and Klein techniques. I immediately
recognized it as my way of movement, as something that
felt right for my body. He held a workshop in Zagreb,
and invited several of us to come to his next workshop
in Berlin, the result of which was the project we did
with him. This project was the Identifying a Landscape
(Prepoznavanje krajolika)1 performance, staged for the
first time at the Zagreb Youth Theatre and produced by
the Zagreb Dance Company. A similar situation to the
one we had with García occurred two years later with
Brazilian choreographer Bebeto Cidra, with whom we
staged the The Hunters of Longing (Lovci čežnje)2 performance at the Zagreb Dance Company. Another one of
my greatest teachers was Martin Sonderkamp, who came
from Amsterdam’s School for New Dance Development
(School voor Nieuwe Dansontwikkeling) to teach workshops here. All of this happened over a very short and
intense period, leaving quite a strong impression on me.
But it needs to be pointed out that, before all that happened, I saw Trisha Brown’s performance at the Dance
Week Festival3 , which had a decisive influence on me: I
saw something I wanted to do on stage, a way I would
like to move.
¬ What did you want to do in the early stages of
your dance education, and how much has it changed
in the meantime?
Of course, my perception of it has changed significantly through my years of experience; it is a sort of a
personal evolution. In the beginning I was fascinated by
the very fact that contemporary dance meant a different
dimension, a new approach at looking at space and the
body, a new way of treating movement, which included
various influences – for example, yoga or martial arts;
content from literature, visual arts, music; or, indeed,
themes from the spheres of science, social commentary, or even political themes. From the very beginning,
contemporary dance has always seemed to me like the
perfect platform for expressing my own attitudes and
opinions – from personal, emotional ones to wider,
social ones. And I still place a lot of stock in learning
new things. Contemporary dance is something that is
constantly developing, and therein lies its beauty and
value. In the beginning I did not have and strictly set
goals. If I found myself in something, I pursued it. But
that initial period was also a period of exploring myself
as a dancer. Perhaps what has changed the most is that,
as a young dancer in a dance company, you have to do
both the things that you are interested in and those you
are less interested in – but this is not bad, because you
acquire a wide range of skills and experiences. Now,
years later, when I work on my own projects, it is natural
that I can focus exclusively on things that interest me,
which is wonderful. But maybe it is wonderful precisely
because I have been through a series of projects by now,
learning a lot from them.
1
Identifying a Landscape (Prepoznavanje krajolika), a dance performance coproduction of the Zagreb Dance Company, the Catalan
Lanònime Imperial ensemble and the Zagreb Youth Theatre (ZKM).
Premiere: December 1996, ZKM. Choreographer: Juan Carlos García;
dancers: Snježana Abramović Milković, Laura Aris, Branko Banković,
Viviane Calvitti, Bebeto Cidra, Ivančica Horvat, Fernando Hurtado,
Ricardo Iazzeta, Blaženka Kovač Carić, Nathalie Labiano, Zrinka Lukčec
Kiko. Actors: Vjekoslav Janković, Vilim Matula; costume design: Neus
Ferrer; lighting design: Mingo Albir; music associate: Zlatko Madžar.
2
The Hunters of Longing (Lovci čežnje), a dance performance
coproduction of the Zagreb Dance Company, the Zagreb Youth Theatre (ZKM) and the Istrian National Theatre – Pula City Theatre (INK
GK Pula). First performance: November 1998, INK GK Pula. Premiere:
February 1999, ZKM. Choreographer: Bebeto Cidra; dancers: Snježana
Abramović Milković, Nikolina Pristaš, Tamara Curić, Hilari Kos, Zrinka
Lukčec Kiko, Andreja Široki; dramaturge: Goran Sergej Pristaš; set
design: Bebeto Cidra, Marina Štembergar; costume design: Marina
Štembergar; lighting design: Aleksandar Mondecar; music editing:
Xavier Maristany.
3
The Seventh Dance Week Festival (1990), Zagreb Youth Theatre,
guest performance of Trisha Brown with choreographies: Lateral Pass,
Opal Loop and Astral Convertible.
¬ Many dancers work as pedagogues today. You
teach and hold dance workshops yourself. Do you
think every dancer can be a teacher; in other words,
what does it take to work as a teacher?
Teaching is also a sort of test, to see how self-aware
we are about our knowledge of dance. It becomes evident
at the moment when you need to pass on that knowledge
to someone else. Working with different pedagogues is
great because not everyone gives you the same instructions – everyone has their own approaches and tools.
Sometimes we don’t understand a certain instruction,
but if we place it in a different context or shape, it can
function as a trigger for creating something new. I enjoy
passing knowledge on to others. Especially when people
recognize it as an art that they can pass through their
own bodies, using them as a means of learning. Personal
experiences are an unusually important aspect of this:
the ability to come to know something through your
58 _ Kretanja 23 | 24
interview: Zrinka Lukčec Kiko body. This changes one’s perception drastically; when
things leave the theoretical level and the body begins to
form its own experiences through its own intelligence.
Often we can’t remember something in our minds, but
the body remembers; that is physical intelligence at
work. But we are still struggling to get dance pedagogy
accepted as serious work, because it still doesn’t seem
to be completely accepted. I think there are still traces
of ignorance and prejudice about our profession – as
in, she dances and she gets paid to do it! Sometimes that
sort of general attitude towards dance is transferred to
pedagogic work as well.
¬ What were your professional beginnings like?
So, as I have already mentioned, soon after participating in the ZPA’s workshops, I was accepted into the
Company. It was already run by Snježana Abramović
Milković. My first dance performances were with Katja
Šimunić, Ksenija Zec, Juan Carlos García, Kilina Cremona,
Martin Sonderkamp. At the time, I felt happy with the
wide spectrum of knowledge of the people I was working with. I was also happy with their creativity, love,
passion for dance and theatre. Moreover, the Company
invited foreign pedagogues and choreographers every
year, which meant that the Company’s members were
able to learn, develop and create new contacts. It opened
up possibilities for new projects. In any case, it was an
extremely positive experience. The ZPA was always very
professional, and the Company’s work was always at a
very high level, which included daily dance trainings
followed by rehearsals. So, I can say that I was in dance
studios all day, every day.
¬ Over the course of your career you have worked
with numerous Croatian and foreign choreographers.
Could you pick some of your favorite experience and
explain what it was that made them special?
In spite of working with numerous choreographers
over my nineteen years at the ZPA, it is hard for me to
pick a particular favorite. I think the precious thing about
dance as a profession is that every new choreographer
brings you a new experience, a new energy. Everyone
is interested in different subjects. This means exploring
the different fields of the performing arts. From the
beginnings of my career, I would single out Sub Rosa4
by Katja Šimunić and Tango Is a Sad Thought Danced Out
4
Sub Rosa, a dance performance production of the Zagreb Dance
Company. Premiere: 1994. at the Zagreb Youth Theatre. Choreographer: Katja Šimunić; dancers: Blaženka Kovač Carić, Snježana
Abramović Milković, Zrinka Lukčec Kiko, Andreja Široki, Ljiljana Zagorac; set design: Nikola Šimunić; costume design: Sunčica Mraković;
(Tango je tužna misao koja se pleše)5 by Ksenija Zec. Later
on, I was especially fond of the performances The Same6 ,
choreographed once again by Ksenija Zec, Something,
Maybe Personal7 and Stripped (Ogoljeno)8 by Snježana
Abramović Milković, This is Not My Cup of Tea9 by Irma
Omerzo. Then I would definitely point out the already
mentioned performance The Hunters of Longing by Bebeto Cidra. A more recent play that stood out was The
Window Cleaners (Perači prozora)10 , directed by Natalija
Manojlović.
lighting design: Olivije Marečić; music: Dora Pejačević, String Quartet
in C Major, op. 58 (Gudački kvartet u C-duru, op. 58).
5
Tango Is a Sad Thought Danced Out (Tango je tužna misao koja
se pleše), a dance performance production of the Zagreb Dance Company. Premiere: 1995 at the Zagreb Youth Theatre. Choreographer:
Ksenija Zec; dancers/actors: Snježana Abramović Milković, Blaženka
Kovač Carić, Zrinka Lukčec Kiko, Hilari Kos, Pravdan Devlahović, Rene
Bitorajac and Kristijan Ugrina. Set design and costum design: Clara
d‘Hubert; dramaturge: Sanja Ivić; music: Tomas Krkač.
6
The Same (Isto), a dance performance production of the Zagreb
Dance Company in association with the &TD Theatre. Premiere: May
29, 2004 at the &TD Theatre in Zagreb. Choreographer: Ksenija Zec;
dancers: Snježana Abramović Milković, Darija Doždor, Zrinka Lukčec
Kiko, Almira Osmanović; dramaturge: Saša Božić; music and music
selection: Damir Šimunović; set design: Igor Pauška; costume design:
Đenisa Pecotić; lighting design: Branko Cvjetičanin.
7
Something, Maybe Personal (Nešto, možda, sasvim osobno),
a dance performance production of the Zagreb Dance Company in
association with the &TD Theatre. Premiere: November 29, 2003 at the
&TD Theatre. Choreographer: Snježana Abramović Milković; dancers:
Darija Doždor, Ana Kreitmayer, Zrinka Lukčec Kiko, Andreja Široki,
Branko Banković, Ognjen Vučinić; dramaturge: Saša Božić; set and
lighting design: Branko Cvjetičanin; costume design: Dženisa Pecotić;
music: Hrvoje Nikšić and Sven Pavlović; video: Mak Vejzović and Hrvoje Franjić.
8
Stripped (Ogoljeno), a dance performance production of the
Zagreb Dance Company. Premiere: October 6, 2007 at the Zagreb
Youth Theatre. Choreographer: Snježana Abramović Milković; dancers: Ognjen Vučinić, Zrinka Lukčec Kiko, Gregor Luštek, Sara Barbieri,
Andreja Široki/Martina Tomić, Arnulfo Pardo, Tomislav Kvartuč, Nikola
Orešković; dramaturge: Saša Božić; music: Damir Šimunović; opera
associate: Zlatko Madžar; costume design: Dženisa Pecotić; lighting
design: Branko Cvjetičanin.
9
This is Not My Cup of Tea (Meni ti to nije baš...), a dance performance production of the Zagreb Dance Company in association with
the Trešnja Theatre. Premiere: January 11, 2003 at the Trešnja Theatre
in Zagreb. Choreographer: Irma Omerzo; dancers: Andreja Široki,
Darija Doždor, Ognjen Vučinić, Pravdan Devlahović, Roberta Milevoj,
Zrinka Lukčec Kiko, Zrinka Šimičić Mihanović; set design: Anastazija
Debelli, music: Aleksandar Antić and TBF; costume design: Josipa i
Marijana Bronić; lighting design: Branko Cvjetičanin.
10 The Window Cleaners (Perači prozora), a coproduction of the
Plešimedo organization, the Zagreb Dance Company and the Student
Center’s Culture of Change program. Premiere: June 20, 2012 at
the &TD Theatre. Choreographer and director: Natalija Manojlović;
performers: Zrinka Lukčec Kiko and Petar Cvirn; set design: Natalija
Manojlović.
¬ What is the difference between working in a dance
company such as the ZPA and working on smaller
projects?
When you are part of a company which has quite
a lot of members, it is natural that you do not have as
much freedom as you do when working on a personal
project, from the subject matter to choreography and so
on. But at the same time, working in a group creates an
excellent feeling, a sort of group energy pulling towards
a common direction. Going through the whole process
and later, of course, performing on stage, it is nice to see
everyone breathing in unison. In the same vein, other
performers can serve as inspiration, because we all learn
from each other. That sort of communal energy manifests
in a special way on the stage. When you are alone in
a studio, a greater degree of self-discipline is required.
With a group process, everyone spurs everyone else on.
¬ What bothers you most in collaborations and
what do you find to be the biggest problems between
choreographers and dancers?
Honestly, I don’t like it when there’s a lack of respect
and trust. In other words, when the choreographer’s
approach is too authoritative. That sort of authoritarian
energy cannot flow. It is a sort of a one-way street which
impedes creative work. As opposed to that, it is nice to
recognize a vast knowledge in others being passed on
with consideration for others. I have the utmost respect
for teachers, be they dance pedagogues or choreographers, who exert no superiority or force because of their
knowledge, but rather pass that knowledge on with love.
Dance is, in all respects, a physical manifestation, all the
while radiating love, and people can sense that. Lately
I have been fond of working with Bo Madvig and Ted
Stoffer. The Danish dance artist Bo Madvig, at the invitation of the ZPA, taught an improvisation workshop in
2012, which gave the participants the tools and skills to
move, direct the moment of their own personal movement, to achieve an awareness of the flow of time and a
sense of arrival. To express ourselves, both individually
and in groups, and in so doing develop and empower
our performing vocabulary. To be able to be a part of a
group without losing our identity. At the invitation of
the Studio – Contemporary Dance Company, the American dance artist Ted Stoffer, currently living in Belgium,
taught a two-week workshop in 2013, which focused on
creating a proposition on stage, and the ways by which
we achieve this. We were given assignments based on
space, time, articulation and tension. These were elementary, basic things, and Stoffer chose the issue of love
as the central theme of the workshop. He gave us tasks
60 _ Kretanja 23 | 24
and sub-tasks. For example, one of the main tasks was
to show attention to someone – or yourself, and it was
achieved through completing smaller tasks, for example,
by singing, giving gifts or being attached to them by a
limb… Or, for example, expressing aggression by singing
a song… And then, after exhaustive work on these tasks
and sub-tasks, a one-hour improvisation session would
ensue. I found it very interesting.
¬ Your latest project, Sola, was realized in collaboration with director Renata Carola Gatica. Is there
any difference when working with a theatre director
instead of with a choreographer?
Of course it is not the same as working with a choreographer. However, over the course of my performing career, I haven’t been restricted to dance; I have
also had an education in acting. As a performer, I have
collaborated with director Franka Perković on the play
Europa, based on a text by Ivana Sajko, as well as with
director/choreographer Natalija Manojlović on the play
The Window Cleaners, which starred actor Petar Cvirin
and myself, locked in a three-by-four-meter cage with
its floor covered in peanuts. We explored the feeling
of confinement, from utter inhibition to ecstasy. But I
would like to stress that, although Renata Carola Gatica
is a theatre director, she uses a great deal of movement in
her work methodology. The assignments I faced during
this process were complex, but were always based on
some sort of movement. For example, in the first scene
of Sola, since we focused on the female characters from
Almodóvar’s movies, who are often prone to emotional
exaggeration, I had to give the impression of being blackout drunk. My state might seem like utter drunkenness,
but the task I was given during rehearsal made me conceptualize the scene in a new way: I envisioned sloughing
off flesh and skin with every breath, leaving less and less
on my bones until nothing but bones remained. So, how
were those bones supposed to move without muscles?
How does one grab a stage prop with bare bones? How
does one move at all? We also had direct bone to bone
contact. So, we worked a lot on breathing. Everything
in Sola has to do with breathing: either we follow the
breathing in a song, or the breathing is the basic, elementary form onto which text is only later added, and
worked on through a pattern of breathing in and out,
adding emotion and movement on top of it. There’s a
huge emphasis on breathing itself. Thematically speaking,
we decided to focus on Almodóvar in Sola because of
the extremity of his modes of expression, his merging of
seemingly disparate extremes such as death and passion,
and the way he escalates emotions.
interview: Zrinka Lukčec Kiko The whole performance has many layers and, in addition to the physical level, which is determined by the
quality of the movements, it includes an emotional level,
and an awareness of the connection between the buildup
of movement, emotion and communication, which is
seldom represented in classic dance performances. Renata
is an extremely intelligent, smart and intuitive author
who knows exactly what she wants, but, at the same
time, insists on exploring, leaving enough room for the
performer to be engaged and occupied. It is a challenge
for me as a performer to perform a play that includes so
many different performative layers.
¬ How do you see the position of the dramaturge in
dance productions? Is it something necessary?
I think it really depends on the type and character of
the performance one is working on. A dramaturge’s job is
to make suggestions to the choreographer and question
his or her decisions, to inspire contemplation about the
decisions that have already been made. I have definitely
learned a lot from the dramaturges I have worked with,
especially from Saša Božić. Working with him opened
up some new perspectives, and I still use a lot of what
I learned from dramaturges in my own performances.
¬ You have also been working as a choreographer for
a long time. What is the difference between a dancer
and a choreographer?
In addition the thorough preparations that every
choreographer has to go through and, of course, an
elaborated theme, thought-out costumes, music, etc., it
is personally easier for me to choreograph a performance
if I put myself into the role of the dancer. One depends
on and complements the other. It is good to assume
both roles at times. When you are a choreographer, it
is good to assume the role of a dancer, placing yourself
in their shoes; the converse is also true – when you are
inside the process, you go through it on your own. From
a dancing point of view, it is important that the dancer
sometimes extract himself from the whole so that the
whole situation can be seen more clearly. Working as
a choreographer, besides meaning a different level of
responsibility to theatre, but also to the people you are
working; it provides you with an opportunity to be creative. I usually pick a subject I want to work on, and then
begin the phase of exploration. I like it when the manner
of exploration stimulates creative energies, both for me
and for the dancers I work with, so that energy can later
be channeled into something new, shaped by the initial
subject I picked. Of course, a choreographer needs to
clearly know what he or she is actually doing, and needs
to be able to communicate that clarity to the performers.
And I seek inspiration in everything. I definitely use film,
music, and even literature, or more generally other forms
of art, painting, sculpting… it can even be science-related.
It all depends on what I am interested at a particular time.
For example, in my recent work All-One (Sve-jedno)11 I
explore movements within the cosmos by breaking and
then re-establishing balance; I juxtapose corporeality
with the video-elements projected through a wide-angle
projector. In this nascent choreography, in which I am the
only dancer, I deal with the functioning of an atom, with
its dissolution and re-emergence; I deal with the motion
of orbits, and a part of the dance resembles levitation.
But I have to say that being a choreographer and being a
dancer are two different jobs. But I still find fulfilment in
moving. In performing. Perhaps it can be compared to a
body which, by moving, creates a sort of an addiction, as
if a certain hormone for happiness is released. And you
feel the need to move. Because your body is happy. Every
time it moves, it is happy. And then you always want to
renew that happiness hormone and to go on living it.
English translation: Vinko Zgaga
11 All-One (Sve-jedno) is an artistic residence project of the Perforations Festival, performed at the Zagreb Dance Center on June 29,
2015. Choreographer and dancer: Zrinka Lukčec Kiko.
Vedrana Klepica (Kutina, 1986) is a theatre dramaturge
and playwright. She studied dramaturgy at the Academy of
Dramatic Art in Zagreb. Six of her dramatic texts have been
staged so far – in Croatia, Australia, Great Britain and Germany. She has participated as an author at the New Plays
from Europe (Neue Stücke aus Europa) theatre festival and
the International Authors’ Laboratory at the Theater Konstanz
in Germany, attended workshops at the National Theatre in
London, and participated at the Women Playwrights International conference in Sweden and at the World Interplay
festivals in Australia and Turkey. She has published texts
about theatre for various publications, and was part of the
production team of several theatre festivals. In 2013 she
directed her first theatrical performance, staging her own
text The Tragic Death of a Business Analyst (Tragična smrt
ekonomskog analitičara). In 2012 she, together with producer
Petra Glad, took over as head of the KUFER art organization.
predstava: U prostoru bez.
predstava: U prostoru bez. < U prostoru bez., Foto: Nina Đurđević >
MIRA MUHOBERAC
Osluškivanje
vlastitosti
O predstavi U prostoru bez. Ana-Marije Bogdanović i Marine Petković Liker
Trilogija
oreografkinja i izvođačica Ana-Maria Bogdanović i
kazališna redateljica Marina Petković Liker prvi su dio
svojevrsne plesno-performativne ili plesno-kazališne
trilogije autorski supotpisale 2012. predstavom Udar, a nastavile 2013. predstavom Tijela bez. i 2014. predstavom U
prostoru bez.1 Kratka predstava Udar nastala je u Studiju za
suvremeni ples, u programu Male forme, odnosno u istraživačkom laboratoriju Studija za suvremeni ples i Plesnom
centru Puls, a premijerno je izvedena 14. studenoga 2012. u
Kulturnome centru Travno na Sceni Travno, u suptilnu duetu
s kratkom predstavom Zaziv Brune Isakovića, koja je izvedena
nakon Udara, iste večeri, a u kojoj dramaturgiju i redateljsku
suradnju potpisuje Marina Petković Liker. Autorski rad Udar
najavljen je rečenicama:
„Ne osluškujemo tijelo, samo se pravimo da ga slušamo.
Ne doživljavamo osjete koje nam šalje, iako se pretvaramo
da se njime bavimo, a zapravo ga umrtvljujemo i ne dozvoljavamo mu da se izrazi. Ekstremno stanje, izazvano sitnim
K
1
Plesni centar Puls i Kulturni centar Travno: Ana-Maria Bogdanović i Marina Petković Liker, U prostoru bez., KUC Travno, 17.
listopada 2014, režija i dramaturgija Marina Petković Liker, izvodi
Ana-Maria Bogdanović.
titrajima iznutra, tijelu može otvoriti njegovo osobno vrijeme
i osobni prostor. Osjećati. Plesati.”
Autorski rad Zaziv najavljen je rečenicama:
„Pozvati, dozvati, zazvati, pustiti da odjekuje, staviti pred
lice, suočiti se. I u tijelu je tama potpuna, a ipak krv do srca
seže, mozak je slijep, a može vidjeti, gluh je i čuje, nema ruku
i doseže, čovjek je, naravno, labirint samoga sebe.”
Plesna kritičarka Iva Nerina Sibila lucidno pronalazi zajedničke elemente u tim predstavama nazivajući ih introspektivnim poetskim tjelesnim monolozima u kojima mala
i produkcijski nezahtjevna forma omogućuje koreografsko
istraživanje, rad Ana-Marije Bogdanović imenujući zonom
prijestupa:
„Udar je profinjena poezija o boli, gubitku, sjećanju i
plesu. Prijestup je višeslojan: autorica se usuđuje na scenu
staviti najkrhkiju razinu života – krah, osamljenost i žudnju, a
sve to kroz nježnu izvedbu koja se temelji na ekspresiji emocija i na evokaciji tih stanja. Time se u izražaju povremeno
približava butu ili diskretno priziva njemački ekspresionizam
tipa Susanne Linke. Ana-Maria Bogdanović djeluje kao da je
tiho ali odlučno rekla ‚Dosta!’ i na scenu stavila samo ono što
joj je presudno važno. (...) U poetskoj naraciji Udara pratimo
plesačicu blijeda, iscrpljena lika, u plesačkoj radnoj odjeći,
bez imalo šminke, u back-stageu velike scene Travno. (...)
Pratimo je i na jedino uporište koje ostaje u trenucima velike
samoće, a to su – majčine oči. Trenutak u kojem izvođačica
jednostavno stane u svjetlo i otvori vlastite oči u sjećanju na
majku, sigurno je jedan od hrabrijih, a ujedno i najsuptilnijih
emotivno prijestupnih trenutaka koje sam unazad nekoliko
godina doživjela na našim scenama. Nadalje, pratimo njezin
ulazak u jednostavno spiralno gibanje kao katarzični povratak u ples i završetak ponovno u samoći, u kojoj autorica
skutrena, sakrivena od pogleda, tiho pjevušeći ozvučuje bol i
preživljavanje. Ma koliko se kretala po skliskom terenu ispovijedi, autorica nimalo ne upada u patetiku ili privatnost, nego
dostiže razinu (ženske) poezije, koja polazi iz najintimnijeg,
a komunicira univerzalno.”2
U drugom dijelu te svojevrsne trilogije o boli i sjećanju, u
predstavi Tijela bez., nastaloj u produkciji Plesnog centra Puls
suradnjom plesačice i koreografkinje Ana-Marije Bogdanović
i redateljice Marine Petković Liker, premijerno izvedenoj 14.
listopada 2013. u Zagrebačkom kazalištu lutaka, sudjeluju tri
izvođačice: Ana-Maria Bogdanović, plesačica suvremenoga
plesa, Deana Gobac, balerina, i Maja Katić, glumica. Osim
prikazivanja izrazito ženskoga i ženstvenoga, razrađena poetskoga senzibiliteta i pokreta poveznica je s predstavom U
prostoru bez. specifičan odnos između izvođačkoga tijela i
rekvizita, konkretnije: u predstavi se pojavljuju raznobojne
staklenke koje izvođačice unose i slažu u prostoru. Plesna
kritičarka Maja Đurinović tu predstavu suptilno određuje
sljedećim riječima:
„No kontrola, odlučnost i promišljenost njih kao vladarica prostora, kao da, pod dojmom simbolične, prozračne
krhkosti izloženog stakla, postaje sve upitnija. Kao da se sve
više podređuju, prilagođuju novostvorenim uvjetima bivanja
u tom preoblikovanom prostoru. Ostajući u drugom dijelu
na razini apstraktnog pokreta, logičnog po tijeku unutarnjeg
impulsa, plesačice se ubacuju između staklenki čineći tijelima
živu voluminoznu intervenciju u prostor. (Što je posve nenametljivo podržano glazbom Frana Đurovića i osjenčano
svjetlom Ivana Dobrana.) Njihova tjelesna plastika postaje
složenija u partnerstvu, spletu i osloncu.”
I potom:
„U posljednjem dijelu (...) ostaju tijela bez, ona ispražnjena, umorna, izgubljena, odustala – i onda, prostor bez
tijela, uz Brelovu Ne Me Quitte Pas u dirljivoj sveprožimajućoj
izvedbi Nine Simone.”3
Treći dio toga niza, predstava U prostoru bez. premijerno
je izvedena 17. listopada 2014. na pozornici Kulturnoga centra Travno, u Novom Zagrebu, a najavljena je kao koautorski
plesno-kazališni rad dviju autorica: Ane-Marije Bogdanović i
2
Iva Nerina Sibila, „Dvije introspektivne poetike”, Plesnascena.
hr, http://plesnascena.hr/index.php?p=article&id=1528, 4. prosinca
2012.
3
Maja Đurinović, „Simbolika stakla”, Plesnascena.hr, http://plesnascena.hr/index.php?p=article&id=1624, 25. listopada 2013.
64 _ Kretanja 23 | 24
Marine Petković Liker. Pažljiv i intrigantan izbor naslova prikazanih predstava pruža mogućnost spajanja triju naslova u
jedinstven trilogijski naslov: Udar tijela u prostoru bez., što
možda najtočnije određuje i posljednju, treću predstavu u
48-minutnu trajanju.
Izgubljeno, nepronađeno, zaustavljeno
redstava U prostoru bez. najavljuje se sljedećim
tekstom:
„Marina Petković Liker i Ana-Maria Bogdanović
u redateljsko-koreografskom suodnosu bave se specifičnom
kvalitetom plesnog pokreta i kazališne izvedbe koja nastaje
istraživanjem suptilne osjetilnosti izvođačkog tijela nasuprot
gledateljevom tijelu, oku i senzibilitetu. U ovoj predstavi taj
se suodnos proširuje kroz autorski rad Nine Đurđević koja
fotografira izvođačko tijelo spajajući unutarnji i vanjski prostor njegovog bivanja i plesanja. Tijelo koje pleše uslojava i
raslojava prostore unutar i izvan sebe u realitetu i izvan njega. Plesati po unutarnjim linijama, bivati u prostoru, dijeliti
krhke i lomne senzacije tijela, otvoriti slojeve osjetilnosti,
uroniti u bunare uske i široke prisutnosti... to su parametri
koji stvaraju rubove po kojima ova predstava nastoji hodati
te balansirati između realnog i teatralnog. Na ovu predstavu
publika je pozvana da svojim prisustvom pridonese lakoći ili
težini jednog plesno-kazališnog događaja.”
Autorice predstave Ana-Maria Bogdanović i Marina Petković Liker hrabro i profinjeno istražuju prostore unutarnjosti
i izvanjskosti, ali i koordinate intime i moguće društvene ili
egzistencijalne geste, što je vidljivo već u naslovu: točka nije
obilježena slovima, nego je označena pravopisnim ili interpunkcijskim znakom, najmanjim sidrištem rečenice, ali i označnicom kraja, završetka i intrigantna semantema ili frazema:
„točka na i”, „krajnja točka”, „ishodišna točka”, „to je bila
točka svega”, „završna točka”, „zaključna točka”... Istodobno,
prvi dio naslova, „u prostoru”, upućuje na kraj neizrečene ili
neizgovorene rečenice, na završetak hrvatskoga niza uredna
rečeničnoga redoslijeda subjekt – predikat – objekt – priložna
oznaka, naglašavajući moguću priložnu oznaku mjesta bez
početka rečenice ili besubjektnu rečenicu. Istodobno točka
napisana kao „.” upućuje na mogućnost promatranja plesačičina tijela, odnosno izvođačičine geste kao izgubljene ili
nepronađene ili zaustavljene u prostoru. Može se nagovijestiti
niz: U rečenici nema subjekta; U prostoru nema točke; U svijetu nema uporišta. Može se povući i naizgled paradoksalni
zaključak: ako je prostor ostao bez točke, onda nema prostora.
Ili: ako je prostor prazan, točka je u prostoru početak, točka
je ono nešto ili onaj netko u prostoru, bez točke je osobnost,
unutarnjost, osoba, čovjek, izvođačica, plesačica ostala „u”.
P
Čini se da autorice, dramaturginja i redateljica predstave
Marina Petković Liker i izvođačica Ana-Maria Bogdanović,
predstava: U prostoru bez. grade plesno događanje na koordinatama toga „u”. Na početku predstave publika ulazi u prostor pozornice u utrobi
arhitekture nekad popularne novozagrebačke Mamutice 4 . Sjedajući na stolice na pozornici ili u prostoru u sceni
Scene Travno, gledatelji su postavljeni na obrub položena
slova „u”, kojemu se kraći, zaobljeni dio, završetak nalazi
na svojevrsnu projekcijskom platnu, završnom zaslonu na
kojemu se prikazuju fotografije Nine Đurđević, iznimna autorska djela kojima je u središtu prije snimljena izvođačica.
Dok gledamo zaustavljene pa naizgled istrzano animirane
snimljene pokrete i figuru plesačice Ana-Marije Bogdanović i slušamo odjeke ženske boli, jeke, zavijajućih glasova,
glasa osamljenosti, bolesti, nasilja, nemirna vjetra, bolnih
pjesama, pjevajućih krikova, tužbalica i ritualne tuge, duboke i bolno pogođene glazbe Frana Đurovića, ulazimo u
4
Mamutica je popularni naziv za obujmom najveću zgradu u
Zagrebu i Hrvatskoj, a također se ubraja među najveće stambene
zgrade u Europi. Nalazi se u Novom Zagrebu, u kvartu Travno, u
ulici Božidara Magovca. Op. ur.
prostor ruba bivšega i sadašnjega, koji će otvoriti ulazak
uživo izvođačice iz prostora slično tvorenih uskih hodnika
i vrata na suprotnoj strani, u otvoru slova „u”, koja izlazi iza pozornice Scene Travno, iz dubine utrobe, kaveza,
zatvorenosti, boli, sjećanja, klaustrofobije, mučnine, povlačeći se crtom gledališnoga ruba i dijalogom prohoda i
traženja povjerenja s publikom na sjedalicama te drugim
vodoravnim rubom prekoputa publike, bez sjedalica, koji
naglašava priča scenskih i cijevi kaveza što se isprepleću
u okomicama i vodoravnim nizovima i u gornjem dijelu,
iznad glava izvođačice i gledatelja, sugerirajući mogućnost
odčitavanja suigre značenjima obrisa zatvorskih cijevi, ali i
vodovodnih cijevi, i ljudskoga krvotoka.
Četvrta staklenka
ijekom izvedbe slovo „u” prostrijet će se u punom pravokutniku pred publikom, u pravokutniku – plesnom
podiju koji mijenja boje, uz izvrsno oblikovanje rasvjete Tomislava Maglečića, ovisno o emotivnu kodu i narativnu
diskursu izvođačičinih pokreta i kretanja, od boje prirode i
T
boje ljudske kože do crne i bijele, od strastvene i turobne
crvene do plave boje neba, mora i snova. Ulazak Ana-Marije
Bogdanović na pozornicu ozvukovljen je i vizualiziran tišinom
i slaganjem staklenki, pa ponovno dubokim jaucima, sintezom jednostavnih a dojmljivih, razrađenih koraka, hodanjem
kao po pijesku, bosim nogama, koračanjem osluškivanjima,
višekratno pognuta pa uzdignuta stava. U tijelu i figuraciji
tijelom ove iznimne izvođačice naslućuju se ispitivanja vlastitosti i tuđosti, osobnosti i drugosti, opipavanja prošlosti i
sadašnjosti, stvarnoga i imaginarnoga.
Potom tijelo, dramaturgija i režija oživljuju i žive osjećaje boli ranjene utrobe, ranjene i oskvrnjene unutarnjosti. U
crvenoj haljini, plesnom kostimu (kostimografkinja Zdravka
Ivandija Kirigin kombinira ga s jednim plavim odrazom, a bose
noge i zlatne cipelice s čizmama na fotografijama) poludugih
rukava i tijelom koje traži pranje u dodiru s vodom, saginjanjem i spuštanjem, izvođačica istražuje svjetove vlastitosti
na morskom dnu, na dnu kaveza, na dnu groba, u svijetu
intime, tišine i osluškivanja. Svjetlom koje izvire među cijevima nagovješćuje se nada, mogućnost postojanja svjetlosne
zrake, zrake sunca, zrake života. Ritualno pranje ruku i tijela
66 _ Kretanja 23 | 24
upućuje na tragiku postojanja, a u izvedbenu kodu na antičku
tragediju u našoj suvremenosti, na tragetkinje, na tragične
junakinje, tihe zborovođe i mudre koreute. Traženje odraza u
vodi staklenke otvara se u novom sjećanju – u gledanju sebe
na novim fotografijama, sa sjenama vlastitosti, razgovora na
rubu ego – alter ego, odraz i odslik, lice i zrcalo. Rastvara se
nova priča i nova glazba, sjetna i snažna: započinje sljedeća
cjelina – sjećanje na ključna događanja i pretvaranja u igru
plesnom umjetnošću, na virtuozne pokrete male pa velike
balerine koja se vidi na platnu kao sjena koja izlazi u svoju
radost. Iz boli rođenja i smrti nastaje radost i vedrina plesa u
pokretima koji se uzvijaju i zavijaju, koji idu unatrag, kružno,
koji se kotrljaju, uvlače u plesni vrtlog usporedan s vlastitim
kruženjem unatrag i naprijed, prikazujući scensku i plesačku
priču o plesu, vježbanju i želji za nastupima, želji za plesom
kao životom i životom kao plesom koju prožima zvuk dalekih
sirena i ponovne, ali drukčije boli.
Otvara se novi zid, ukazuju se nova vrata: izvođačica
dolazi na fotografiju, a odlazi sa scene istodobno s odlaskom na fotografiji, iz vrata, iz vježbaonice, iz hodnika
čekanja, iz doma, iz stana, iz škole, iz ovostranosti, s indi-
predstava: U prostoru bez. kativnom rukom uzdignutom prema gore, izvođačica izlazi
uživo s pozornice. Na plavičastom pravokutniku prostrtom
na pozornici, podijeljenom u tri dijela, pojavljuju se sjene
projicirane odozgo, s neba, pojavljuje se ista ruka koja je
otišla iza posljednjih vrata, prema nebu, čuje se snažan
šum, huk iz utrobe prirode, čuju se zrikavci. Pojavljuje se
izvođačica u zlatnim cipelama, na novom životnom podiju,
i počinje svoj ples redateljski poduprt elementima kazališta
sjena. U snažnu i strastvenu plesu na podu/podiju izvođačica se u ljubavnom zanosu sljubljuje sa sjenom, s tijelom,
s drugim u sebi, u zrcalnom i morskom odrazu, uz jednu
staklenu zdjelu s vodom, uz jednu staklenku, uz sjećanje
na najdraže. U igri sjenama odozgo velika sjena još je iznad
nje, odnosno u njezinu zrcalnu životnom podiju, u blistavoj sceni u kojoj se čuje šum mora i huk ptica i zrikavaca;
neki od nas prepoznat će u tim zvukovima prirode huk i
jeku Lokruma. Dok u sjećanju ostaje izvrnuta posuda i
prolivena voda, obrisi života i sjene, predstava se vraća
na svoj novi početak, na novo „u”: izvođačica se vraća na
pozornicu, gleda u podij na kojemu je maloprije plesala,
pita se je li to bio san ili java, imaginacija ili stvarnost. U
majčinskom i dječjem čučnju i ogledanju identiteta racionalan pogled prepleće se sa zvončićima i koracima koji
odlaze sa scene – hrabrim i odlučnim koracima koji idu u
mrak kao u novi život...
„Nosim košaru punu tišine. Nema vjetra ni otisaka.
Znam da je kiša već pala. Znam da mi pod petom stoji trn.
Pustit ću kosu, nasloniti dlan, udahnuti šum.
Nisu sve ptice još tu.”
Tri staklene posude mogu označavati tri zrcalna dijela
predstave, ali i tri stadija u životu, ili tri stupnja vlastitosti,
tri osobe, tri osi, pa i tri točke u prostoru bez jedne točke. U
fizici pojam prostor označava predodžbu o udaljenostima.
Podsjetimo: prostor ima tri dimenzije, tj. tri smjera postavljena
međusobno pod pravim kutom; svako tijelo u prostoru ima
određenu visinu, širinu i duljinu; svako se tijelo može kretati
u trima dimenzijama – naprijed ili natrag, desno ili lijevo, gore
ili dolje, kako bi u prostoru zauzelo neki položaj. Budući da
se sve osim u prostoru giba i u vremenu, vrijeme je četvrta
dimenzija. Te se četiri dimenzije, znamo, zovu kronotop. Ona
četvrta staklenka, uz rub ljestava koje idu prema gore, u nebeska prostranstva, može značiti i četvrto uporište i četvrtu
nadu, ali i četvrtu predstavu ovoga autorskoga dvojca, novu i
drukčiju (auto)biografsku predstavu, kronotop, mjesto i datum,
točku, doba dana, koje izlazi iz doba oniričnosti i tuge kojima
je obvijena ova predstava i zauzima položaj u prostor-vremenu.
Hrabra, snažna, suptilna i samozatajna, vrhunska introspektivna predstava U prostoru bez. istražuje dubinske identitetne slojeve. Jedna je od najpotresnijih, najdomišljenijih i najbolje izvedenih predstava koje sam gledala posljednjih godina.
razgovor: Ana-Maria Bogdanović
razgovor: Ana-Maria Bogdanović < U prostoru bez., Foto: Nina Đurđević >
MIRA MUHOBERAC
Krećem od
tišine koja je u
svima nama...
Razgovor s
Ana-Marijom Bogdanović
B
udući da se plesom bavite od najranijega djetinjstva,
pretpostavljam da pogled na plesnu umjetnost seže
u dječju prošlost. Koje je vaše prvo sjećanje na ples?
Moje prvo sjećanje na ples vjerojatno je kad sam imala
četiri godine, kad sam došla u Kazalište Trešnja na jedan od
prvih satova klasičnoga baleta kod Silvije Hercigonje. Vjerojatno je to bila moja preplašenost kad je progovorila. Sve
sam to skupa s nekih četiri godine nekako drukčije zamišljala,
ali ipak, iako sam se jako prepala na početku, odlučila sam
nastaviti i išla k njoj nekoliko godina, u njezin studio, bila je
jako stroga prema nama. A kod Silvije Hercigonje najviše me
ljutilo sljedeće: imam dva imena i još jedno krsno ime, ali me
ona nije zvala ni Ana-Maria ni Ana, kako mi obično skraćuju,
ni Mia, kako mi je nadimak, nego me zvala po mome krsnom
imenu – Josipa, a to ime nikako nisam voljela i nisam htjela
da me se tako zove, tako da me je strašno ljutila.
¬ Čega se sjećate iz tih prvih dana s obzirom na plesne
vježbe?
Nekakva sjećanja iz tog vremena jesu baš one vježbe na
štapu. Kad bi nas posložila, imala je jednu dugačku šibu kojom
nam je prijetila. Metode nekadašnjega učenja i današnjega
jako su, jako različite. Kad bismo neko dijete danas tako uveli
u svijet plesa, vjerojatno ne bi ostalo u njemu. Ali svejedno
sam se jako zaljubila u taj ples i počela sam usporedno, čim
sam krenula s plesom, i s ritmičkom gimnastikom, i to me
jednostavno potpuno obuzelo, non-stop sam plesala, stalno sam nešto vježbala i meni je sve zapravo predstavljalo
ples, uopće mi ništa nije bilo važno, nego samo vrijeme koje
sam provodila u dvorani. Koncipirala sam sebi u školi dan
da mogu što više vremena provesti u dvorani. A neka prva
prava sjećanja, s počecima mog školovanja, vezana su svakako za moju profesoricu Vlastu Kaurić, koja je utjecala na
moju majku da sestru i mene, koje smo tada polazile Muzičku
školu u Gundulićevoj, odluči upisati u Školu za ritmiku i ples
u Bogovićevoj ulici1 .
¬ Od 1985. do 1991. plesali ste kao članica Komornog
ansambla suvremenog plesa, Studija za suvremeni ples,
Geste, Terpsihore. Završili ste Školu za ritmiku i ples 1987.
Poslije ste se školovali u inozemstvu. Kakvo je bilo vaše
školovanje, kako danas na njega gledate?
Definitivno, moje školovanje u Hrvatskoj vezano je za Školu za ritmiku i ples, tj. Školu suvremenog plesa Ane Maletić:
1
Škola za ritmiku i ples bila je smještena u Bogovićevoj ulici 7,
a danas nosi ime Škola suvremenog plesa Ane Maletić i nalazi se u
Laginjinoj 13 u Zagrebu. Op. ur.
provela sam tamo prekrasnih osam godina i zaista sam imala
prilike raditi s velikim stručnjacima koji su predavali u školi.
Moje kasnije školovanje, koje sam nastavila na Flamanskoj
plesnoj akademiji (Vlaamse Dansacademie) u Belgiji, u Bruggeu, koju sam završila, dio je moga života kojeg se nekako
najradije sjećam. To su bile godine u kojima sam se mogla
posvetiti isključivo i jedino i samo plesu. Jer to zapravo nije
bilo moguće za vrijeme školovanja prije, ovdje u Zagrebu, jer
sam polazila dvije škole, jednu ujutro, drugu popodne, navečer sam bila u ansamblu. Vrlo rano su me iz Škole suvremenog
plesa Ane Maletić uzeli u ansamble, i u ansambl Terpsihora,
koji je kratko postojao. I nakon toga vrlo brzo sam, još kao
učenica Škole, počela raditi u KASP-u, s Milanom Broš, to
je bilo veliko iskustvo za mene kao zapravo jednu jako, jako
mladu plesačicu.
¬
Koji su pedagozi za vas bili odlučujući?
Sigurno je najvažniji pedagog za mene bila Vlasta Kaurić,
koja je najviše utjecala na mene, kao i način na koji je s nama
radila, stvari koje nam je prenosila, znanje koje smo od nje
upijali, koje je bilo znatno šire nego samo o plesu. Potom
prekrasna Zoja Radmilović, s kojom smo također imali prilike tada raditi. To su neki počeci u Školi. Poslije sam imala
priliku u Studiju za suvremeni ples raditi nekoliko godina sa
Zagorkom Živković: to je za mene bio vrlo važan period jer
sam se tada susrela s tehnikom koju dotad nisam radila, susrela sam se prvi put s nečim drukčijim od svoga temeljnog
školovanja, koje je zapravo bio Labanov princip, počela sam
raditi s njom tehniku Graham. A nakon toga surađivala sam
još s velikim brojem pedagoga ovdje u Hrvatskoj. Poslije sam
vani radila s mnogo pedagoga, bili su to Steven Iannacone,
Karel Vanderweghe, Jorge Vazquez; ti su ljudi zaista ostavili
veliki trag na meni. Bitno je da pedagog osim svoga znanja,
koje mora prenijeti na plesače, prenese i ljubav prema tom
pozivu. Bitan je pozitivan pristup, uz disciplinu koju nužno
mora imati svatko tko želi biti plesač. Zapravo je jako važno
da se prenese ljubav – jer bez toga nema nikakva kreativnog
rada, nemoguće je raditi kvalitetno. Kad sam tek upisala Školu, jedna od prvih pedagoginja bila mi je Maja Đurinović, ona
je tada bila jako mlada, tek je završila školu, mislim da smo
bili prva generacija koju je vodila. I dan-danas mogu se sjetiti
satova kad smo s njom radili, njezina osmijeha i s kakvim je
veseljem i entuzijazmom s nama radila. Meni je to, u tadašnjoj
Školi ritmike i plesa, bio jedan drugi pristup od onoga mojega
početka s klasičnim baletom i ritmičkom gimnastikom, kad je
pedagog ostajao uvijek odvojen od nas, kad pedagoginja ne
promišlja o svakom od nas pojedinačno. U toj sam se školi
osjetila i potpuno drukčije nego u Muzičkoj školi, jer bio je
u toj školi osoban pristup svakom djetetu. Za pedagogiju je
jako važno da prepoznaš kod nekog s kim radiš kako možeš
njegove najbolje sposobnosti izvući van.
70 _ Kretanja 23 | 24
¬ Od 1991. do 1994. polazili ste Flamansku plesnu akademiju u Bruggeu i metodički svladali plesne tehnike Graham,
Nikolais, Horton. Ta je plesna akademija poznata i po tome
što se osim očekivanih plesnih predmeta uče i jazz dance,
step, pjevanje i gluma. Diplomirali ste 1994. Kakva su vaša
iskustva s te plesne akademije?
Ta je plesna akademija vrlo zanimljivo organizirana. Naime, jednakom je satnicom bio zastupljen klasični balet i
suvremeni ples i potom nešto manje jazz dance, ali učili smo
i druge tehnike, i step i pjevanje i glumu. I zaista, kad prođeš jedan takav trogodišnji dril, možeš nakon toga zapravo
ići na audicije i za mjuzikle i za suvremenoplesnu skupinu.
Upravo činjenica što je sve navedeno bilo jednako zastupljeno bila mi je vrlo važna u izboru akademije i zato sam
odlučila otići u Belgiju baš na tu akademiju; a odlučujuće
je bilo što je tamo predavao Steven Iannacone. Prva djevojka koja je ikad otišla iz Hrvatske na neku akademiju bila
je Vera Bilbija, moja draga kolegica koja još dan-danas kao
plesačica radi u Barceloni; ona je zapravo vrlo brzo uspjela
dovesti Stevena Iannaconea u Hrvatsku. Još dok je bila studentica prve godine, ovdje je organizirala jedan seminar s
njim, što je bio moj prvi susret s tim iznimnim umjetnikom
i prvi susret s tehnikom Alwina Nikolaisa. Nakon što sam
se susrela s njima, radila sam još mnogo drugih tehnika,
ali ostala sam zaljubljenica definitivno u nju i zapravo sam
se nakon akademije opet posvetila proučavanju upravo te
tehnike. Nekako mi je u početku bilo iznimno važno da na
početku dođem na akademiju na kojoj on predaje i zato
sam i otišla na audiciju tamo i odlučila se za tu akademiju.
Steven Iannacone pripadnik je četvrte generacije plesača u
Nikolaisovoj skupini. Način na koji je predavao, disciplina
koju nam je prenio za mene su bili potpuno novo iskustvo.
I zaista, poslije toga, i ovdje smo ga pratili, zapravo pratili
smo ga svuda kamo je išao. Bio je jedan seminar u Budvi;
svi smo odlazili za njim gdje god je bio. Zapravo, to je bio
jedan od prvih seminara koji smo uopće polazili. Naime,
tada nije bilo seminara kao danas, da se može otići svaki
mjesec na neki drugi seminar u Hrvatskoj.
¬ Kada ste shvatili da će ples biti vaše zanimanje? Studirali
ste, naime, i diplomirali pravo i radili ste i kao pravnica.
Zapravo sam oduvijek, još odmalena govorila da ću biti
plesačica i da će to biti moje jedino zanimanje. Ja jesam iz
umjetničke obitelji: moja majka i otac jesu jednako tako bili
umjetnici, mama mi je bila filmska montažerka, a tata redatelj. Ali kako okolnosti, nažalost, nisu bile sretne za mene,
pa mi je zapravo već s trinaest godina baka postala starateljicom i više nisam imala roditelje, tako je bakina briga za
moju sestru i mene sve više onemogućavala bavljenje plesom onako kako sam to željela. Strah je počeo susprezati tu
moju želju. Posljednja dva razreda u srednjoj školi upisala
razgovor: Ana-Maria Bogdanović sam plesno usmjerenje, jer je to tada bilo moguće, bila su
odvojena dva i dva razreda, prva su dva razreda odgovarala
općoj gimnaziji, a u trećem i četvrtom polazila sam plesno
usmjerenje. Tako sam odmah nakon završene srednje škole
htjela otići na plesnu akademiju. Međutim, moja se baka
kao moja starateljica nije nikako slagala s tim, nego je inzistirala na tome: „Prvo kruh u ruke, pa onda pleši.” Kad sam
završila školu, gledala sam što mi najviše od svih predmeta
leži pa sam upisala Pravni fakultet u Zagrebu. I onda sam sa
svojom bakom zapravo napravila pakt. Pitala sam ju: „Ako
u roku završim Pravni fakultet i ako još budem imala godine
koje su ispod granice za pokušaj da otiđem na neku audiciju
u inozemstvu, hoćeš li mi tada to dopustiti, hoće li to biti
moguće, hoće li to tada biti u redu?” I ona je rekla: „Dobro,
ako to tako stvarno bude, onda ću te ja u toj tvojoj odluci
podržati.” Moje završavanje Pravnoga fakulteta u rekordnom
roku, već sam s dvadeset i jednom godinom diplomirala, bilo
je zbog silne želje da se bavim plesom i onim što sam jedino
i najviše željela. Sve sam to vrijeme plesala, već sam počela
i predavati, usporedno sam radila sve i zapravo se nikad iz
plesa nisam maknula, zapravo sam se tih četiriju godina
pripremala za prijamni ispit na plesnoj akademiji. Kad sam
završila plesnu akademiju, nakon vremena koje sam provela
u Belgiji, dogodila se jedna situacija koja je bila izvan bilo čije
odluke tada, pa se moje bavljenje pravom dogodilo slučajno:
bila sam prijavljena na Hrvatskom zavodu za zapošljavanje
kao pravnica. Vratila sam se u Hrvatsku 1995. Kad su bili
Bljesak i Oluja, bila sam mobilizirana s burze i tako sam
počela raditi kao pravnica. I dogodilo se da sam sljedećih
sedam godina u svome životu baveći se plesom usporedno
radila u Ministarstvu obrane. Tamo sam prošla niz mjesta
koja su dosta visoko kotirana. Došla sam tako do načelnice
nekih odjela, pa sam došla i do djelatne vojne službe, imam
čin natporučnice.
¬ Kako je bilo raditi u Ministarstvu obrane, s obzirom na
vašu primarnu ljubav – prema plesu?
Tamo sam se dobro uklopila. Disciplina koju sam imala u
životu zapravo se tamo izvrsno kontekstualizirala. Radila sam
i ono za što sam mislila da se nikad ne bih mogla time baviti.
Radila sam i sa stradalnicima Domovinskoga rata, to je bila
tematika koja me osobno jako pogađala. Kao pravnica sam
u Ministarstvu obrane radila sedam godina. Na to sam jako
ponosna jer sam imala priliku tamo i mnogo naučiti, tamo
sam srela fantastične ljude. To moje nehtijenje toga prava
nekako se time pobilo, sve skupa, tako se dogodilo.
¬
Ipak ste napustili pravo?
Onda, ipak, u jednom je trenutku prevagnulo to da sam
shvatila kako želim mnogo više vremena provoditi u svome
umjetničkom radu dalje. Shvatila sam i da je tako kako sam
radila moguće raditi određeno vrijeme, kad je čovjek mlađi. I
tada sam donijela odluku, jer sam imala predstave i sve drugo,
odlučila sam se konačno, veoma kasno, tek 2001. prijaviti za
status samostalne umjetnice. Moja ideja da ću biti plesačica
mislim da je postojala od prvoga trenutka, kad sam otišla
kao djevojčica u Kazalište Trešnja. Zapravo nije bilo dvojbe
za mene. Bilo je dvojbe za ljude koji su bili oko mene.
¬ Koje ste predstave gledali u djetinjstvu? Dokle sežu vaša
prva gledateljska sjećanja? Pamtite li predstave u Trešnji u
kojima ste sami sudjelovali ili se sjećate nekih kazališnih,
plesnih, opernih predstava koje ste gledali s roditeljima i
sestrom?
Kao prvih predstava više se sjećam Hrvatskoga narodnog kazališta i bijelih baleta, i tamo je vjerojatno nastala
ona moja ideja zašto želim biti balerina. Ali poslije sam
vrlo brzo počela gledati predstave Zagrebačkoga plesnog
ansambla pa Studija za suvremeni ples. U Komediji su to
bila vremena kad se mogao vidjeti suvremeni ples. Bile su
to predstave koje su zaista ostavile velik dojam na mene.
Sjećam se iz toga vremena svoga gledateljskog iskustva
više kao nekih pokretnih slika nego onoga što sam stvarno
proživljavala. Sjećam se da je bila jedna predstava koja je
na mene ostavila snažan dojam – predstava Vlaste Kaurić
sa Zagrebačkim plesnim ansamblom. Još se danas sjećam
kako je izgledao taj plakat, kako je rađen bio s likovnom
umjetnicom Renatom Chalupa-Prvan; ta se predstava zvala
Siliton / Moving Art, to je valjda jedna od prvih predstava
multimedije kod nas. Taj sam multimedijski performans gledala kad sam bila malena djevojčica, godine 1977. Suradnik
za glazbu bio je Marko Ruždjak, za pokret Vlasta Kaurić, a
za film Vladimir Petek.
¬ Postoje li plesne predstave koje ste gledali, a koje su
obilježile vaše plesno stvaralaštvo?
Budući da mi nekad nismo imali priliku vidjeti mnogo
stranih predstava, a nismo ni imali priliku ići na seminare
kako je to moguće danas, na neki smo način bili dosta izolirani. Sjećam se prvih Tjedana suvremenoga plesa, to je za
mene bilo nevjerojatno, i iskustvo za mene i moju sestru.
Sestra i ja smo cijelu plesnu školu provele zajedno, moja se
sestra cijeli život bavila plesom i profesionalno je u Hrvatskoj
također završila sve što se moglo završiti u području plesne
umjetnosti. Bile smo u istom razredu. Kako smo iz Muzičke
škole krenule zajedno, tako smo osam razreda bile skupa.
Iako je ona četiri godine starija od mene, uvijek su meni, to
je bila smiješna priča, u školi govorili da sam starija sestra
Bogdanović. Nakon što smo provele osam godina u istim
razredima, čak smo u nekim ansamblima na početku i poslije plesale, ipak ju je poslije medicina više okupirala. Sada je
subspecijalistica anesteziologije.
¬
Kojih se predstava sjećate s Tjedna suvremenog plesa?
Sjećam se svih predstava Tjedna suvremenog plesa, tamo
smo sestra i ja gledale sve predstave zaredom, tri predstave dnevno, uza sve svoje druge obveze. Sjećam se i svoga
šoka kad sam prvi put gledala plesače Trishe Brown: to mi je
bilo nevjerojatno, ta brzina. Onda se sjećam skupine Józsefa
Nagyja, to mi se jako urezalo u sjećanje. Bila sam oduševljena
i Pjesmama ljubavi i smrti Milka Šparembleka, zamišljala sam
da bih mogla jednoga dana tako plesati, kako bi bilo divno
kad bih ja tako plesala, to mi je bilo fascinantno.
Ali mojoj je odluci da odem van studirati dalje nešto povezano s plesom prevagnula jedna predstava Baleta Gulbenkian s kojom je gostovao u Hrvatskom narodnom kazalištu:
to je bila koreografija u kojoj je trinaest muškaraca otvaralo
vrata. Energija koja se osjetila u trenutku kad se tih trinaest
vrata otvorilo i sve što se dogodilo iza toga... bila sam toliko
fascinirana... i ta energija koju su prenijeli na mene. Pomislila sam: „Aha, to je ples, kad ti sjediš u gledalištu i kad ti
to osjetiš, želim to učiti dalje, kako se to stvara.” Tada sam
definitivno odlučila: sigurno ću to otići dalje studirati. Samo
mala poveznica na Gulbenkian: dogodilo mi se da sam prije
dvije godine bila na plesnom kongresu u San Marinu i tamo
sam upoznala glavnog solista koji je dvadeset godina plesao
u Gulbenkianu, danas ima u Portugalu svoju skupinu, i on je
bio jedan od glavnih plesača među tih trinaest. I kad mi je
rekao: „Pa ja znam Milka Šparembleka, ja sam u Gulbenkianu”, i kad smo razgovarali, i kad je govorio koliko je godina
tamo bio, i kad je rekao da je gostovao tada u Zagrebu, rekla
sam: „Trinaest vrata”, a on: „Da, da, trinaest vrata”. Moja
suradnica koja je tada bila sa mnom na tom kongresu rekla
je da me nikad takvu nije vidjela, petnaest minuta sam samo
šutjela i sjedila pored tog čovjeka. Dogodilo se: kad se poveže
cijeli život, kad se spoji – sve ima smisla, to je to, vratiš se na
početak, poveznica.
¬ S kojim ste koreografima surađivali? Koji su koreografi
najviše utjecali na vašu plesnu kreativnost?
Negdje od svojih početaka prvo bih spomenula u Hrvatskoj definitivno Vlastu Kaurić, potom Zagu Živković, onda
sam nakon toga surađivala s nekim našim mlađim koreografkinjama, s Katarinom Đurđević. U svibnju 2003. uz
Katarinu Đurđević koreografirala sam plesni projekt Šuma
Striborova u Kazalištu Trešnja, a u listopadu 2006. izvodila
u nezavisnom plesnom projektu Mekoslon, koji je koreografirala Katarina Đurđević. Surađivala sam i s Larisom Lipovac
– u lipnju i srpnju 2003. izvodila sam u plesnom mjuziklu
Myth of Labyrinth. S Melitom Spahić Bezjak surađivala sam
u njezinu projektu 110 Quartet of Two u veljači 2014, bila
sam izvođačica.
Naravno, Milana Broš nezaobilazna je u svemu tom mojem radu i mislim da je rad s njom i u Komornom ansamblu
72 _ Kretanja 23 | 24
suvremenog plesa dosta obilježio smjer kojim ću ići. Recimo,
neka prva gostovanja s KASP-om ostala su mi u trajnom
sjećanju, prije svega pristup Milane Broš i njezin profesionalizam; način na koji je radila s plesačima bitan je dio moga
stvaralačkog početka.
Poslije kad sam u Belgiji radila s drugim koreografima,
opet sam se stalno vraćala, recimo, nečemu izvornom, što
me je potaknulo da nekamo odem. Znači, mnogo prije nego
što sam otišla na akademiju zanimala sam se za Pinu Bausch i
plesni teatar, tako da mi se to čini kao logičan slijed. Na akademiji u Belgiji sam svih tih triju godina zapravo intenzivno
radila na glumi, koja je bila jedan od vrlo važnih predmeta.
Naš profesor Alain Vautier predavao je poslije i na Béjartovoj
akademiji u Lausanni i drugdje, bio je iznimno zahtjevan i
mogao si biti fantastičan plesač, ali ako na njegovim satovima
nisi napravio što si trebao, zapravo nisi mogao proći godinu.
To se studentima tada možda činilo nepotrebnim. Meni se
već tada to nije tako činilo, veoma sam cijenila njegov rad,
iako je to u mojem plesnom studiranju bio možda najteži
predmet. Zapravo je bilo veoma teško sve to proći s njim
i mislim da je jako, jako važno za plesača, za izvođača da
prođe jedno takvo školovanje. Veoma sam zahvalna zbog
svega što je s nama napravio. To je tada bio tvrd orah, a
profesor Alain Vautier tako je sve postavio u situaciju bi li se
ti trebao time baviti, je li to to da si se svaki dan pitao jesi
li dobro izabrao, trebaš li se baš time baviti, možda to nije
to, stavljao te stalno u stalnu sumnju i propitivanje zašto,
kako, odakle, što su jako, jako važne stvari koje si morao sa
sobom pregristi kao student.
¬ Kad govorimo o vašim predstavama, mislim pri tome i
na vaš koreografski rad i na vaš izvođački udjel, od čega
polazite i koji vas tip teme i plesa zanima? Da se podsjetimo, kao izvođačica sudjelovali ste u projektima: Ograničen
pokret (2001), Sluh oka (2002), Myth of Labyrinth (2003),
Mekoslon (2006), Tribun Mauricija Kagela, Fabularium
Animale Silvija Foretića i Pingvini Zorana Juranića (redatelj je bio Andreas Bode, 2007), Jesam. (2008/2009), Tko
mi je uzeo žvaku iz pepeljare?! (2010/2011), Refrakcije
(2011), Udar/Zaziv (2012), Od terora. Ženska gesta kao
odgovor na krizu. Kazalište empatije. Pokušaji (2013), Tijela
bez. (2013), Sedam (2013), 110 Quartet of Two (2014), U
prostoru bez. (2014) te u velikom broju emisija belgijske
televizije i HTV-a. Kao koreografkinja potpisujete sljedeće
koreografije: Tramvaj ili način gledanja (2001), Siliton ili
Nova Moving Art (2002), Šuma Striborova (2003), Stranac,
tko je to? (2003), koreografija i izvedba u projektu saksofonista Claudea Delanglea Električno popodne na 22. MBZu (2003), U nama (2006), Jesam. (2007), Tko mi je uzeo
žvaku iz pepeljare?! (2010), Refrakcije (2011), Udar/Zaziv
(2012), Od terora. Ženska gesta kao odgovor na krizu. Ka-
razgovor: Ana-Maria Bogdanović zalište empatije. Pokušaji (2013), Tijela bez. (2013), Sedam
(2013), U prostoru bez. (2014). Scenski pokret i koreografiju potpisujete u dramskoj predstavi Nora ili Lutkina kuća
(2007) u režiji Anje Maksić Japundžić. Na čemu temeljite
svoje predstave?
U svome stvaralaštvu dosad mislim da sam prošla različite faze. Na početku, moja prva cjelovečernja koreografija
Tramvaj ili načini gledanja bila je za veći broj plesača, bila je
osmišljena za šest, sedam izvođačica, a koreografiju sam jako
temeljila na plesnoj tehnici, na izvedbenoj kvaliteti plesačica,
na njihovoj tehničkoj pripremljenosti. Znači, tu jest postojala
određena tema kojom sam se bavila, ali u to vrijeme, a to je
bilo dosta brzo nakon završetka mog studija, bila sam iznimno fascinirana tehničkom izvedbom plesača. To me jako
zanimalo i na tome sam inzistirala. Niz godina nakon toga
nisam više bila u prilici mnogo puta raditi s velikim brojem
plesačica, zbog financijskih uvjeta u kojima danas radimo.
I to je nešto što bih ponovno možda voljela raditi: predstavu s velikim brojem izvođača. Istodobno, voljela bih vidjeti
kako bih danas postavila iste te stvari i što bi mi danas bilo
važno kod izvođačica. Ali, kako sam poslije sve više i više
radila duete pa sola, iako je solo bila forma od koje sam
stalno bježala i za koju sam mislila da ju ne volim, tako nisam ni željela raditi na taj način. Došao je trenutak u mome
životu kad sam odlučila da želim napraviti solo, to je bilo
prije nekoliko godina kad sam napravila Udar, s redateljicom
Marinom Petković Liker, i mislim da tu negdje kreće drugi
dio mog stvaralaštva, predstave koje sam napravila nakon
toga: Udar, Tijela bez. i U prostoru bez. To je nekakva trilogija koja je krenula u potpuno drugom smjeru. Pitam se je li
na takav način moga rada utjecao rad s Marinom Petković
Liker kao redateljicom ili općenito mjesto na kojem se sada
kao izvođačica nalazim. Vjerojatno jedno i drugo. Ali danas
ponajprije krećem od pokreta koji se nalazi u meni, od tišine
koja je u svima nama. Krećem iz onog unutarnjega, potpuno.
¬ Nikad ne stvarate koreografiju krećući od izvanjskoga
oblika?
Sada kad počinjem stvarati koreografiju, rijetko krećem
iz neke vanjske forme, iz neke vanjske okosnice, iz neke
vanjske ideje. Ponajprije krećem iz toga što u tom trenutku
osjećam i što želim reći. Važno je da svaka umjetnost, a
pogotovo plesna, komunicira i to je ono što zapravo pokušavam. Pokušavam pokazati da je zapravo sve ples i da je
sve pokret. Zapravo mi sve vrijeme plešemo, samo je pitanje
kako to prezentiramo. Svaki naš udah na neki način djeluje
i na nekoga tko je pokraj nas. I zanima me sve više kako
percipiraju koreografiju i ples ljudi koji dolaze na predstavu,
zanima me sve više odgovornost s kojom dolazim na scenu,
što ja nudim, ali jednako tako zanima me kako to što nudim
prima osoba koja je došla gledati predstavu. I jako je važno
da nešto prenesem kao izvođačica, da nešto kažem. Nije mi
toliko važno da prenesem točno nekomu ideju koja je meni
bila u glavi, nego taj prijenos, transfer koji se mora dogoditi.
Recimo, Steven Iannacone imao je jednu jako ružnu usporedbu kad nam je objašnjavao na prvim satovima na Osnovama
koreografije, kad smo dobivali neke manje zadatke koje je s
nama radio, kad nam je objašnjavao zašto je nešto dobro ili
nije, onda nam je rekao: „Gledajte, možete nešto izvoditi i
možete se izvrsno u tome osjećati, ali ako netko drugi tko
to gleda, a došao je s namjerom da to vidi i osjeti i da mu
vi nešto prenesete, ako gledatelj ništa od svega toga nije
doživio, onda se to zove masturbacija na sceni.” Naravno da
sam bila jako šokirana time, njegovom izravnošću. I onda je
rekao: „Onda to možete raditi kod kuće.” Tu se malo našalio,
ali bila sam nemalo šokirana time što je tada rekao, možda
se nisam u cijelosti s time tada slagala, ali radeći sve više i
više shvaćam to što je rekao. Razumijem da danas postoje
različiti tipovi koreografa koji se bave različitim stvarima,
upravo suprotnim od toga čime se ja bavim, zaista gledam
iznimno mnogo predstava i volim pogledati svačiji rad, ali
moram priznati da je u svakoj kazališnoj predstavi, nevažno
je li dramska ili plesna, meni jako važno da ponesem nešto
sa sobom kad izađem van.
¬
S kojim suradnicima najviše surađujete i, naravno, zašto?
Najviše posljednjih godina surađujem s redateljicom Marinom Petković Liker zato što jako dobro razumijemo jedna
drugu i mislim da se iznimno dobro nadopunjujemo. Volim
raditi i radila sam posljednjih godina dosta s različitim umjetnicima, i s likovnim umjetnicama, s glazbenicima. Zapravo
volim surađivati s ljudima iz neke druge umjetničke branše
jer mislim da mi to daje slobodu i širinu. Kad biram suradnike
ili kad oni biraju mene, najvažnije mi je da imamo mogućnosti za daljnji rast, da na svakoj probi imamo mogućnost
da jedan od drugoga nešto naučimo, da se pomaknemo u
kreativnom ili nekom drugom smislu. Volim nove situacije
u kojima imam osjećaj da stalno nešto učim, zapravo. Kad
bih mogla, vjerojatno bih bila cjeloživotna studentica koja bi
upisivala različite škole i fakultete, jer to jako volim. A užasno
volim raditi i s mladim ljudima. Što se tiče suradnika, postoji
jedna kontradikcija: volim raditi s velikim profesionalcima,
i to u različitim umjetnostima, ali velik sam dio svoga rada
posvetila radu s amaterima.
¬ Od 1997. do 2009. bili ste stručna voditeljica Plesnog
studija centra mladih Ribnjak. Kao koreografkinja dramsko-plesnog projekta Stranac, tko je to? dobili ste nagradu
za najbolju amatersku kazališnu predstavu u Zagrebu te
posebnu nagradu za kazališno istraživanje na 43. festivalu
kazališnih amatera Hrvatske u Karlovcu 2003. Zašto volite
raditi s amaterima?
Druga moja strana ide za tim da mi je vrlo zanimljivo
raditi s nekim tko je još neizrađen materijal. Zapravo imam
priliku izvući dosta iz toga, naći nekakav temelj u pokretu,
uopće u kretanju. Tako da mi je vrlo često zanimljivo kad mi
u dvoranu, na moje satove, dođe netko tko se veoma malo
bavio plesom. Zanimljivo je vidjeti originalni pokret, što nam
je svima primarno: način kako se krećemo. Iz toga se uvijek možemo vratiti nekakvu temelju i opet možemo mnogo
toga naučiti. A još mi je zanimljivo, kako ja predajem tehniku
Alwina Nikolaisa, vidjeti koliko brzo ljudi, figurativno rečeno, s ceste mogu brzo napredovati ako se pravilno primijeni
ta tehnika na njihovu tijelu, kako ona zapravo fantastično
djeluje, što se može dobiti u veoma kratko vrijeme: može
se iz njih izvući nevjerojatan pokret, nakon samo nekoliko
godina. S nekim ljudima koji se kroz ples šeću i koji su amateri, s njima sam u veoma kratkom vremenu radila plesne
predstave tako da ni sama nisam mogla vjerovati kako sam
ih dovela do toga.
¬
Na koje predstave mislite?
Recimo, u predstavi koju sam nedavno radila, Tijela bez.,
surađivale smo Maja Katić, koja je glumica i koja ima neka
predznanja o pokretu, Dejana Gobac, koja je bila balerina
HNK-a, ali se dosta bavi konceptualnim i suvremenim plesom, i ja. Meni je prekrasno bilo raditi s njima i taj trio bio
je zapravo pokušaj traženja toga prirodnog pokreta. Naime,
upravo različitost načina na koji je moje tijelo bilo školovano, na koji je Dejanino tijelo bilo školovano i načina na koji
se Maja kreće bila je sve vrijeme vrlo zanimljiva, razvijala je
i stvarala zanimljive razlike i cjelinu različitosti, odnosno taj
kontrapunkt koji smo sve vrijeme dobivale. To je iznimno
zanimljivo i baš je to bio za mene velik izazov i eksperiment
i stalno sam se susretala s novim pitanjima. Recimo, Maja me
stalno pitala: „Zašto ti hoćeš da ja kao glumica budem u plesnom projektu?” Nije joj bilo jasno jer uvijek postoji mišljenje
da je ples nešto što je visoko estetizirano i da težimo samo
tomu, visokoj estetici, a mislim da mene u plesu sve više i
više zanima nešto drugo, zanima me neko nesavršenstvo, a
sve manje savršenstvo.
¬ Kad smo već došli do pojmova savršenstvo i nesavršenstvo, kako biste odredili ples u hrvatskom kontekstu?
Kontekst plesa u Hrvatskoj: to je pitanje za jedan ogroman intervju, za veliku i posebnu raspravu i analizu. Ipak,
ukratko mogu reći da se u plesu u Hrvatskoj događa sve
više i više stvari posljednjih desetak godina, što nužno ne
znači da se događa bolje. Sjećam se vremena kad sam
gledala mnogo kvalitetnije strane predstave u Hrvatskoj
nego što ih danas gledam. Znači, postoji sigurno prostor
da pogledamo unatrag, nije sve što je bilo prije bilo loše, a
sve što sada gledamo ne znači da je genijalno, ne znači da
74 _ Kretanja 23 | 24
je sve što radimo danas dobro. Mislim da strategija kojom
se nezavisna scena pokušava razvijati i u ovim financijskim
uvjetima ide k usitnjavanju, stvara se hiperprodukcija malih projekata koji se ne igraju poslije dovoljno, koji nemaju
produkcijsku potporu iza sebe kakvu bi trebali imati. Nisam
sigurna da je to pravi put. Nekad prije, kad su postojala tri
ansambla, svi zajedno, onda smo govorili da bi bilo lijepo
kad bi postojala još jedna skupina, i još jedna, i još jedna.
Da, bilo bi lijepo, ali to što mi radimo danas nisu nove plesne skupine kakve postoje, primjerice, u Belgiji, Nizozemskoj
i Njemačkoj, to su umjetničke organizacije koje su zapravo
pravne osobe koje dobivaju novce za male projekte. Ali one
iza sebe nemaju logistiku koju bi trebale imati za stvaranje.
Iz tih malih budžeta mi bismo u jednom projektu trebali
financirati i prostor u kojem ćemo raditi i prostor u kojem
ćemo izvoditi, tako da mislim da takav način financiranja
i rada i takvo usitnjavanje svega zajedno ne omogućava
kvalitetan i stalan rad. Mislim da bi se zajedničkim umrežavanjem umjetničkih organizacija i ansambala i institucija
omogućio drukčiji rad koji bi imao svoj kontinuitet, neku
promišljenu strategiju i, u krajnjem cilju, vidljiv rezultat
rada. Ne postoji prava transparentna evaluacija nečijega
rada, konkretno jesi li ti napravio kvalitetan projekt, pa
čak ako bi kritika ili broj gledatelja bili ti koji evaluiraju taj
rad, mislim da ni jedno ni drugo zapravo nisu parametri.
Apsolutno je svejedno. Možete se potruditi i napraviti jako
mnogo izvedaba, mnogo više nego što ste se obvezali ugovorom, a to vam neće značiti ništa i ne znači da će vam to
omogućiti da sljedeće godine radite veći projekt uz bolju
financijsku potporu.
¬ Vaš je muž dramski umjetnik, Dubrovčanin iz poznate
kazališne obitelji Martinović, glumac Maro Martinović,
član Zagrebačkoga kazališta mladih, imate kćer Neu, koja
ide u četvrti razred osnovne škole i zanima se za plesnu i
kazališnu umjetnost. Budućnost plesa i osobna budućnost
u vas su povezane?
To je također zanimljivo pitanje, budućnost plesa i osobna
budućnost. Kao samostalnoj plesnoj umjetnici, plesačici suvremenog plesa koja sada ima četrdeset i pet godina nije tako
jednostavno govoriti o nekakvoj budućnosti, ali se u budućnosti svakako vidim intenzivno u koreografskom radu, vidim
se intenzivno u pedagoškom radu, voljela bih raditi s mnogo
ljudi, voljela bih biti u većem projektu u kojem bih mogla i
voljela biti dio nečega. Volim svoj autorski rad i volim taj tip
projekata, ali zaista žudim raditi na nekom većem projektu
u kojem bih bila jedan kotačić u cijelom sustavu, gdje bi sve
zajedno na kraju bio jedan veliki projekt. Volim surađivati i
mislim da je to iznimno važno za umjetnika: da ima priliku
raditi mnogo s drugim ljudima i da ima priliku raditi s različitim
ljudima. Koliko će to biti moguće, to će budućnost pokazati,
razgovor: Ana-Maria Bogdanović ali svakako ću nastaviti putom kojim sam dosad išla, a to je
da se bavim cjeloživotnim učenjem o plesu, jer to nikad ne
prestaje. I kao što mi je Steven Iannacone rekao kad sam ga
upoznala: ples nije samo umjetnost, biti plesač – to je način
života. Plesač nisi kad uđeš u dvoranu, plesni umjetnik si otkad se probudiš do trenutka kad ideš spavati, otkad se rodiš
do trenutka smrti. Jednostavno, ples je moj život, trudit ću
se raditi ga najbolje što znam i nadam se da ću imati prilike
raditi, jer najteže se izboriti za priliku, za priliku da radiš to što
voliš i to što misliš da jesi, to je najteže u tome. Svaki dan se
uvjeravaš i vjeruješ u to, ali trebaš imati neke druge potpore
da bi to bilo moguće. Sve što ima veze s plesom strašno me
veseli, ali mislim da sam sada sve više u fazi kad sam svjesna
da trebam raditi s drugima, biti pedagog. Ta izmjena energije
iznimno je važna. Ne zadovoljava me samo rad sa sobom i
na sebi i nikad me nije zadovoljavao. Jako volim raditi s mladim ljudima, jako sam voljela predavati u Školi suvremenog
plesa Ane Maletić, zapravo sam jako sretna kad na plesnim
predstavama sretnem ljude koji su kod mene trenirali, koji
su kao potpuni amateri došli u moju dvoranu i ostali deset
godina, kad vidim da je ostao neki mali crv toga, da sam ih
uspjela zainteresirati za ideju uopće što ples jest, čime se to
mi zapravo bavimo, da sam ih uspjela zainteresirati za način
na koji gledaju predstave, sve mi je to strašno drago i bitno.
Mira Muhoberac, dramaturginja, teatrologinja, kro-
radionica. Kao dramaturginja i redateljica te kazališna ravnateljica na scenu je postavila, radeći i kao umjetnička suradnica
i jezična savjetnica, više od stotinu i četrdeset predstava u
okviru Teatra M&M, koji vodi skupa sa sestrom blizankom
Vesnom Muhoberac, i u svim zagrebačkim kazalištima, u Kazalištu Marina Držića u Dubrovniku, na Dubrovačkim ljetnim
igrama i u gotovo svim hrvatskim gradovima. Dobitnica je
brojnih hrvatskih i međunarodnih nagrada u području znanosti, umjetnosti, esejistike, edukacije, sporta. Kao studentica Akademije dramske umjetnosti i Filozofskoga fakulteta
Sveučilišta u Zagrebu dobila je višekratno Rektorovu nagradu
za izvrsnost u studiranju i za najbolji znanstveni i umjetnički
rad, a kao profesorica dobila je četrdeset i devet Rektorovih
nagrada Sveučilišta u Zagrebu kao mentorica studentima,
najviše Filozofskoga fakulteta. Utemeljila je Odsjek za kroatistiku na Karlovu sveučilištu u Pragu, na kojem je tri godine
i predavala. Suautorica je i suvoditeljica s Vesnom Muhoberac međunarodnoga projekta Ragusini već petnaest godina,
a samostalno i međunarodnoga projekta FEB (istraživanje
folklorne i etnografske baštine i međunarodni simpozij) u
Dubrovniku te voditeljica i suradnica u brojnim projektima
(npr. Repertoar hrvatskih kazališta, HAZU) u zemlji i inozemstvu. Radila je više godina i kao istraživačica u Odjelu
za teatrologiju HAZU-a.
atistica, komparatistica književnosti, sveučilišna nastavnica, redateljica, urednica, djeluje istodobno u znanstvenom,
predavačkom i umjetničkom području. U rodnom Dubrovniku nakon osnovne škole završila je usporedno gimnaziju i
glazbeno-plesnu školu, a od najranijega djetinjstva bavila se
sportom te u statusu vrhunske sportašice u plivanju osvajala prva mjesta na državnim i međunarodnim natjecanjima.
Diplomirala je na Akademiji dramske umjetnosti Sveučilišta
u Zagrebu i na Filozofskom fakultetu Sveučilišta u Zagrebu,
na kojem je završila i poslijediplomski i doktorski studij usporedno s doktorskim studijem na Karlovu sveučilištu u Pragu.
Osmislila je, predavala i predaje više od pedeset kolegija, na
Filozofskom fakultetu Sveučilišta u Zagrebu, Umjetničkoj
akademiji u Osijeku, Filozofskom fakultetu u Puli, Hrvatskim
studijima u Zagrebu. Autorica je i urednica više od osamdeset knjiga iz područja dramaturgije, teatrologije i edukacije.
Uređuje časopise Prolog, Novi Prolog, Dubrovnik, Kazališne
novine, Mim..., a posljednjih godina urednica je književnosti u
Vijencu Matice hrvatske. Kazališne i književne kritike, osvrte,
eseje, kolumne, portrete i razgovore objavljuje na HRT-u, u
Forumu HAZU-a, u Kazalištu, Hrvatskom glumištu, u Vijencu... Sudjeluje na znanstvenim konferencijama, simpozijima
i seminarima kao predavačica i voditeljica okruglih stolova i
performance: In a Space Without.
performance: In a Space Without. < In a Space Without., Photo: Nina Đurđević >
MIRA MUHOBERAC
Listening
to the Self
On the dance performance In a Space Without.
by Ana-Maria Bogdanović and Marina Petković Liker
A Trilogy
horeographer and performer Ana-Maria Bogdanović and theatre director Marina Petković Liker
staged the first part of their dance-performative
or dance-theatre trilogy in 2012 with the performance
Stroke (Udar), and built upon it in 2013 with the performance Bodies Without. (Tijela bez.) and in 2014 with the
performance In a Space Without. (U prostoru bez.)1 The
short performance Stroke was created at the Studio – Contemporary Dance Company, as part of the Small Forms
(Male forme) program, and as part of the research laboratory of the Studio – Contemporary Dance Company and
the Puls Dance Center, and it premiered on November
14, 2012 at the Cultural Center Travno, as part of a subtle duet with Bruno Isaković’s short performance Invoke
(Zaziv), which was performed after Stroke, on the same
evening, and whose dramaturge and directorial collaborator was Marina Petković Liker. Stroke was announced
in these words:
“We do not listen to our bodies, we just pretend to.
We do not heed the sensations it sends us, although
we pretend to care about it; we actually numb it down
and prevent it from expressing itself. An extreme state,
C
1
The Puls Dance Center and Cultural Center Travno: Ana-Maria Bogdanović and Marina Petković Liker, In a Space Without. (U
prostoru bez.), Cultural Center Travno, October 17, 2014, director
and dramaturge: Marina Petković Liker, performed by: Ana-Maria
Bogdanović.
induced by tiny tremors within, can open a personal
space and personal time for the body. To feel. To dance.”
Invoke was announced in these words:
“To call, to summon, to invoke, to let it ring out, to
face and confront. Even within the body, the darkness
is complete, and yet blood reaches the heart, the brain
is blind and yet can see, it is deaf and yet can hear, has
no arms and yet can reach; man is, of course, a labyrinth
of himself.”
Dance critic Iva Nerina Sibila has lucidly found common elements in these performances, calling them introspective poetic body monologues in which a small and
easily produced form enables an exploration through
choreography, calling Ana-Maria Bogdanović’s work a
zone of transgression:
“Stroke is refined poetry about pain, loss, memory
and dance. The transgression is multi-layered: the author
dares to place the most fragile level of her life – collapse,
loneliness and longing – on stage, all of this through
her performance which is based on the expression of
emotions and the evocation of these states. In her expression, she sometimes almost resembles butoh dance or
discretely recalls German expressionism in the vein of
Susanne Linke. Ana-Maria Bogdanović seems as if she has
quietly but resolutely said ‘Enough!’ and placed only that
which is of key importance on the stage. (…) In the poetic
narration of Stroke we follow a dancer, a pale, emaciated figure, in a dancer’s work clothes, with no makeup,
backstage at the Scena Travno. (…) We also follow her to
a haven which is still there with her in moments of great
loneliness: her mother’s eyes. The moment when the
performer simply steps into the light and opens her eyes
in memory of her mother must be one of the bravest,
and at the same time most subtle moments of emotional
transgression that I have seen on stage in recent years.
Later, we watch her enter a simple spiral motion as a
cathartic return back into the dance, and the ending,
once again in silence, in which the author, curled up and
hidden from view, gives voice to her pain and survival by
softly singing. Although she treads the slippery slope of
a confession, the author never lapses into soppiness or
over-sharing, but reaches the level of (women’s) poetry,
which starts off from the most intimate, and communicates the universal.”2
“In the final part (...) they become bodies without,
emptied, tired, lost, given up – and then, a space without
bodies, accompanied by Brel’s Ne Me Quitte Pas in Nina
Simone’s touching, pervasive interpretation.”3
The third part of this sequence, the performance In a
Space Without. premiered on October 17th, 2014 on the
stage of Cultural Center Travno, in Novi Zagreb, and it
was announced as a joint dance-theatre project of two
authors: Ana-Maria Bogdanović and Marina Petković
Liker. Their thought-out and intriguing choice of titles
provides us with the opportunity to meld the three titles
into a unified trilogy: The impact of bodies in a space without. which might be an accurate description of the final,
third performance, with a running time of 48 minutes.
The second part of this trilogy about pain and memory, Bodies Without., a production of the Puls Dance
Center in the collaboration of dancer and choreographer Ana-Maria Bogdanović and director Marina Petković
Liker, premiered on October 14th, 2013 at the Zagreb
Puppet Theatre, and starred three performers: Ana-Maria
Bogdanović, a contemporary dance artist, Deana Gobac,
a ballerina, and Maja Katić, an actress. In addition to the
display of an extremely female and feminine, detailed
poetic sensibility and movement, another connection to
In a Space Without. is the specific relationship between
the performing body and the props; specifically, the
performance features multi-colored glass jars which the
performers carry out and arrange in the space on the
stage. Dance critic Maja Đurinović subtly defines the
performance:
“But the control, determination and prudence of
them as rulers of this space seem, under the influence
of the symbolic, breezy fragility of the glass on display,
to become increasingly questionable. It is as if they gradually submit, adapt to the newly-created conditions of
existence in this reshaped space. In the second part,
the dancers remain on the level of abstract movement,
which follows the logic of the inner impulse, and as they
interpose themselves between the glass jars, their bodies
create a living, voluminous intervention into space, which
is understatedly supported by Frano Đurović’s music
and shadowed by Ivan Dobran’s lighting. Their bodily
plasticity becomes increasingly complex through their
partnership, plexus and mutual support.”
And then:
Lost, not found, halted
n a Space Without. was announced in these words:
“The director-choreographer axis of Marina Petković Liker and Ana-Maria Bogdanović problematizes
the specific quality of dance movement and theatrical
performance which arises through the exploration of
the subtle sensuousness of a performer’s body when
subjected to a viewer’s body, gaze and sensibility. In this
performance, their interrelation is expanded through the
artistic work of Nina Đurđević, who photographs the
performing body, thereby connecting the inner and outer
worlds of its being and dance. The dancing body folds and
unfolds spaces within and without, in reality and outside
it. Dancing along the inner lines, being in space, sharing
the fragile, breakable sensations of the body, opening up
layers of sensuality, diving into pools of narrow and wide
presence… these are the parameters that form the edges
along which this performance attempts to tread, balancing
between the real and the theatrical. This performance
invites the audience to, through its presence, contribute
to the levity or weight of a dance-theatre event.”
The authors of the dance work, Ana-Maria Bogdanović and Marina Petković Liker, bravely and sophisticatedly
explore not only these inward and outward spaces, but
also the coordinates of intimacy and possible social or
existential gestures, which is visible in the title itself: the
period is not marked with letters, but with punctuation,
a point or dot, the smallest possible anchor point for a
sentence, but also a marker of ending or finality, and
an intriguing semantic or phraseological element, as in:
“dotting the Is”, “the point of no return”, “the point of
origin”, “the point of it all”, “reach a boiling point” etc…
2
Iva Nerina Sibila, „Dvije introspektivne poetike” (“Two Introspective Poetics”), Plesnascena.hr, http://plesnascena.hr/index.
php?p=article&id=1528, December 4th 2012.
3
Maja Đurinović, „Simbolika stakla” (“The Symbolics of Glass”),
Plesnascena.hr, http://plesnascena.hr/index.php?p=article&id=1624,
October 25th, 2013.
78 _ Kretanja 23 | 24
I
performance: In a Space Without. At the same time, the first part of the title, in space,
implies an end of an unspoken sentence, the ending of
a sequence of Subject – Verb – Object – Adjunct, thereby
emphasizing that this sentence may not have a subject or
indeed a beginning. At the same time, this dot expressed
as “.”, which might point to the possibility of interpreting
the dancer’s body, or her gesture, as lost, never found, or
halted in space. A sequence is hinted at: no subject in the
sentence; no dot in the space; no foothold in the world.
One could even draw a seemingly paradoxical conclusion:
if there is no dot, there is no space either. Or: if the space
is empty, then a dot in the space is a beginning, a dot
becomes someone or something in the space; without
it, the personality, the internal, the person, the human,
the performer, the dancer is left “in(side)”.
It seems the authors, dramaturge and director Marina
Petković Liker and performer Ana-Maria Bogdanović,
build their dance on the coordinates of that “in(side)”.
At the beginning of the performance, the audience
enters the auditorium in the bowels of the once popular
Mamutica4 in Novi Zagreb. Sitting on their chairs on the
stage or around it in the auditorium of Scena Travno, the
audience is laid out in a frame in the shape of the letter
“u”5 , whose shorter, round end is located on a projection
canvass of sorts, a final screen displaying Nina Đurđević’s
photographs, stunning works of art depicting the previously filmed performer. As we watch the frozen and
then twitchingly animated motions and figure of dancer
Ana-Maria Bogdanović while listening to the noises of
a woman’s pain, echoes, howling voices, voices of loneliness, illness, violence, unquiet winds, songs of pain,
singing cries, dirges and ritual sadness – the excellent,
deeply and painfully fitting music by Frano Đurović – we
enter the space of the past and of the present, which
opens up to allow entrance to the performer, coming in
from a space of similarly tight corridors and doors on the
opposite side, in the mouth of the letter “u”, coming up
from behind the stage, from the depths of the bowels,
the cage, the enclosure, pain, memory, claustrophobia,
and sickness, dragging itself along the edge of the auditorium and through a trust-seeking dialogue of movement.
The juxtaposition of the audience, seated at one side,
and the other, parallel side, is emphasized by a cage-like
tangle of pipes, intertwining along the walls and the ceiling, above the heads of the performer and the audience,
4
“Mamutica” is a popular nickname for the largest building in Zagreb and Croatia, and one of the largest residential buildings in Europe.
It is located in Božidar Magovac Street in Travno, Novi Zagreb.
5
In Croatian u means in(side).
which suggests the possibility of discovering a meaning
shared in the contours of prison bars, plumbing pipes,
and the vessels of the human bloodstream.
The Fourth Jar
uring the performance, the letter “u” is laid out
in front of the audience, on a rectangular dancefloor whose colors shift, under the excellent
lighting design of Tomislav Maglečić, according to the
emotional code and narrative discourse of the performer’s motions and movements; from the color of nature and
color of human skin to black and white, from a passionate
and mournful red to a blue the color of the sky, the sea,
and dreams. The entrance of Ana-Maria Bogdanović on
the stage is accompanied by silence and the arranging
of glass jars, and then once again by deep howls, a synthesis of simpler, but effective and thought-out steps,
walking barefoot as if on sand, all the while listening,
sometimes hunched over and sometimes upright. The
body and figuration of this exceptional performer hint
to the exploration of selfhood and otherness, personality
and difference; the feeling out of the past and the present,
the real and the imaginary.
D
After that, the body, dramaturgy and direction bring
to life the sensation of pain in wounded and violated
insides. In a red dress and a dance costume with elbowlength sleeves (costume designer Zdravka Ivandija Kirigin
pairs it with a blue reflection, much like she pairs bare
feet and golden shoes with the boots in the photographs),
the dancer’s body seeks cleansing through contact with
water; by bending over and sinking down, the performer
explores worlds of self at the bottom of the sea, at the
bottom of a cage, at the bottom of a grave; in a world
of intimacy, silence and search for sound. The light that
breaks through the pipes hints at hope, at the possibility
of a ray of light, a ray of sunshine, a ray of life. The ritual
cleansing of hands and body points to the tragedy of
existence, and its performative code recalls the classical
tragedy of our contemporary world; the tragic heroines,
the silent choir-leaders and the wise choral dancers.
Searching for her reflection in the water in one of the
jars, a new memory reveals new memories – of looking
at herself in new photographs, at shadows of the self,
at conversations between the ego and the alter ego, the
visage and its reflection, the face and the mirror. A new
story and new music unfolds, wistful and strong: the
next level commences – memories of crucial events and
the metamorphosis into play through the art of dance;
of the virtuosic movements of a young, and then grown
ballerina, visible on the canvas as a shadow that erupts
in joy. From the pain of birth and death, the joy and
brightness of dance emerges through winding and spiraling movements, travelling back, circular, or rolling
into a whirlwind of dance parallel to its own spiraling
back and forth, telling us an exceptional tale of dancing,
of practice and the desire to perform; about dance as a
form of life and life as a form of dance, permeated by
the sound of distant sirens and a new, but different pain.
A new wall opens up, a new door is unveiled: the
performer steps into the photograph, leaving the stage at
the same time she, in the photograph, walks out the door,
out of the rehearsal room, out of the waiting room, the
home, the apartment, the school, off to the other side,
with her hand tellingly raised high, as the performer
leaves the stage. On the bluish rectangle spread across
80 _ Kretanja 23 | 24
the stage, divided into three parts, shadows appear, projected from above; out from the sky, the same hand that
walked out the door appears, and a loud noise is heard,
deep from the bowels of nature: the song of crickets.
The performer appears, wearing golden shoes, at a new
stage of her life, and begins her dance, complemented by
elements of shadow theatre. In a strong and passionate
dance over the podium/floor, the performer is entwined
in the throes of passion with her shadow, her body, the
Other within her, mirrored in the sea, next to a jar of
water, and the memories of what she holds most dear.
Within the play of shadows above her, a large shadow
still looms above her, in her mirror-life stage, in a radiant
scene in which the whisper of the sea and the song of
birds and crickets can be heard; recognized by some of
performance: In a Space Without. us as the roar and echo of the island of Lokrum. While
all that remains in the memory is the spilt jar of water,
the contours of life and shadow, the performance returns
to its new beginning, to a new “in(side)”: the performer
returns to the stage, stares at the podium on which she
had danced moments ago, wondering whether it was
a dream or waking life, her imagination or reality. In a
motherly yet childlike crouch of reflected identities, the
rational gaze is interfered with by the jingling of bells and
the footsteps leaving the stage – brave and determined
steps, stepping into the darkness as if stepping into a
new life…
“I carry a basket full of silence. There is no wind and
no footprints.
I know the rain has already fallen. I know there’s a
thorn under my heel.
I will let my hair loose, lean on my palm, breathe in
the murmurs.
All the birds are not here yet.”
The tree glass jars can represent the three mirrored
parts of the performance, but also three stages of life
or three degrees of self, three persons, three axes, and
even three points in a space without a point. In physics,
the term space denotes our concepts of distance. Space
has three dimensions, three directions set at right angles
against each other; every body in space has a certain hight,
width and length; every body can move in three dimensions – back or forth, right or left, up or down, in order
to assume a position in space. And because everything
moves through time as well as through space, time is
the fourth dimension. These four dimensions together
are what we call a chronotope. That fourth jar, next to
the ladder ascending upwards, to the heavenly spheres,
can also represent a fourth foothold, a fourth hope, but
also a fourth performance by this artistic duo, a new and
different (auto)biographical performance, a chronotope,
a place, date and time of day that will mark the end of
the dreamlike age of sadness that this performance is
shrouded in, and which pinpoints its place in space-time.
Brave, strong, subtle and self-effacing, the brilliant
introspective performance In a Space Without. explores
deep layers of identity. It is one of the most harrowing,
most measured and best-performed dance works I have
seen in recent years.
interview: Ana-Maria Bogdanović
interview: Ana-Maria Bogdanović < In a Space Without., Photo: Nina Đurđević >
MIRA MUHOBERAC
MY STARTING
POINT IS THE
Silence Within
All of Us...
A conversation with
Ana-Maria Bogdanović
S
ince you have been dancing since your earliest
childhood, I assume that your perspective on
the art of dance extends to a very young age.
What is your first memory of dance?
My first memory of dance is probably one when I
was four and came to the Trešnja Theatre to take one
of my first classes of classical ballet, taught by Silvija
Hercigonja. I think I was intimidated when she first
spoke. When I was four, I had a somewhat different
idea of what it would be like, but even though I was
initially very frightened, I decided to stick with it and
took classes for several years, in her studio, as strict
as she was with us. The thing that infuriated me most
about Silvija Hercigonja was this: I have two names
and a Christian name, and she never called me Maria
or Ana, or by my nickname, Mia; she insisted on calling
me by my Christian name, Josipa, which was a name
I didn’t like and didn’t want to be called that; so this
upset me greatly.
¬ What do you remember from those early days,
when it comes to dance exercises?
My memories from that time mostly have to do with
those barre exercises. When our teacher lined us up, she
had a very long switch which she used to threaten us.
The teaching methods used then and now differ greatly.
Nowadays, if we were to try to introduce a child to the
world of dance using those methods, the child probably
wouldn’t stick around. But I fell in love with that dance
anyway, and as soon as I started dancing, I also enrolled
in a class in rhythmic gymnastics, and it completely took
me over; I danced all the time, I was always practicing
something, and everything was dance to me, nothing else
mattered except the time I spent in the dance studio. And
my first memories, of the beginning of my education, are
definitely connected with my teacher Vlasta Kaurić, who
influenced my mother to enroll both me and my sister,
who were at the time enrolled in the Music School in
Gundulićeva Street, in the School for Rhythm and Dance
in Bogovićeva Street1 .
¬ From 1985 to 1991 you danced as a member of the
Chamber Ensemble of Free Dance, the Studio Contemporary Dance Company, and the Gesta and Terpsihora
companies. You were later educated abroad. What was
your education like, how do you feel about it today?
Definitely, my education in Croatia is closely tied to
the School for Rhythm and Dance, i. e. Ana Maletić’s
School of Contemporary Dance: I spent eight wonderful
years there and I really had an opportunity to work with
amazing experts who taught at the school.
My further education, at the Flemish Dance Academy
(Vlaamse Dansacademie) in Bruges, Belgium, where I
got my degree, is the part of my life on which I look
back most fondly. Those were the years when I was
able to devote myself exclusively to dance. That hadn’t
really been possible during my earlier education, here
in Zagreb, because I went to two schools, one in the
morning, the other in the afternoon, while spending my
evenings at the Company. At a very early age, when I was
still at the School of Contemporary Dance I was accepted
into different companies, and into the Terpsihora company, which existed briefly. Soon after that, while I was
still as student at the School, I started working at the
KASP (Chamber Ensemble of Free Dance) with Milana
Broš. That was a huge experience for me, as a very, very
young dancer.
¬ Which teachers were most important for you?
Definitely, the most important teacher for me was
Vlasta Kaurić, who had the greatest influence on me; the
way she worked with us, the things she imparted on us,
the knowledge we acquired from her, all of these things
went above and beyond mere dance. Then the wonderful
Zoja Radmilović, with whom we also had the opportunity
to work. Those were my beginnings at the School. Afterwards, I had the opportunity to work with Zagorka Zaga
Živković for several years, at the Studio – Contemporary
Dance Company; that was a very important period in
my life because it was then that I first encountered a
technique I had never worked with before; for the first
1
The School for Rhythm and Dance was located at 7 Bogovićeva Street, and is today called Ana Maletić‘s School of Contemporay
Dance, and located at 13 Laginjina Street in Zagreb.
84 _ Kretanja 23 | 24
time, I encountered something different than my basic
education. It was actually founded on Laban’s principles;
I started working with Zaga Živković on the Graham
technique. After that I worked with a large number of
teachers here in Croatia. I later worked with numerous
teachers abroad; Steven Iannacone, Karel Vanderweghe,
Jorge Vazquez; those people really left an important mark
on me. In addition to his or her knowledge, which he or
she has to impart on the dancers, a dance teacher needs
to inspire a love for this calling. A positive approach is
important, along with the discipline that is a necessity
for anyone who wants to be a dancer. In fact, imparting
this love is very important, for without it, there can be no
creative work, it is impossible to do quality work. When
I had just enrolled in the School, one of my first teachers
was Maja Đurinović, who was very young at the time,
she had barely finished school herself – I think we were
the first generation she taught. I can still remember our
classes with her, her smile, joy and enthusiasm for working with us. For me, studying at the School for Rhythm
and Dance at the time, this was a completely different
approach from my beginnings with classical ballet and
rhythmic gymnastics, where the teacher always worked
at a distance from us, without considering each of the
students as an individual. In this school I felt completely
different than at the Musical school, because the teachers
had a personal approach to every child. It is an important
part of teaching to recognize how to get the best out of
every individual pupil.
¬ From 1991 to 1994 you attended the Flemish
Dance Academy in Bruges and methodically learned
the Graham, Nikolais and Horton dance techniques.
That dance academy is famous for teaching, in addition to the usual dance classes, jazz dance, tap-dancing, singing and acting. You graduated in 1994. What
were your experiences from that dance academy like?
That dance academy is organized in a very interesting
manner. Classical ballet and contemporary dance were
equally represented in our class schedules, followed by
some jazz dance, as well as other techniques, tap-dancing,
singing and acting. And indeed, once you have been
through such a three-year drill, you can audition both
for musicals and for contemporary dance troupes. The
fact that all of the abovementioned things were equally
represented was an important one when I was choosing
which academy to apply for, and that was why I decided
to go to Belgium to this particular Academy; the decisive
factor was that Steven Iannacone taught there. The first
Croatian young girl who went to study at an academy
abroad was Vera Bilbija, my dear colleague who still
interview: Ana-Maria Bogdanović works as a dancer in Barcelona; in fact, she soon managed
to bring Steven Iannacone to Croatia. While she was still a
first-year student, she organized a seminar with him here,
and that was my first encounter with this exceptional
artist and the first time I heard of the Alwin Nikolais
technique. After that encounter, I worked on many other
techniques, but I remained infatuated with this one, and
I have dedicated my entire life after the Academy to
studying that particular technique. Somehow, I thought
it was very important for me to go to the Academy where
he taught, and that was why I decided to audition there.
Steven Iannacone was a member of the fourth generation
of dancers in Nikolais’ group. The way he taught, the
discipline he instilled in us, that was a completely new
experience for me. And, even later, we still followed him
wherever he went. There was a seminar in Budva; we
all came wherever he would go. There weren’t as many
seminars as today back then; nowadays you can attend
a different seminar every month in Croatia.
from the Faculty of Law in record time, when I was twenty-one, was the result of a strong desire to study dance,
the only thing I wanted to do. I kept dancing throughout
my studies, I already started teaching dance, I did all
of it simultaneously, and I never really quit dancing, in
fact, I spent those four years preparing for my dance
academy admissions exam. When I graduated from the
dance academy, after spending all that time in Belgium,
a situation happened that was beyond anyone’s control,
which resulted in my inadvertent legal career: I was listed
at the Croatian Employment Service as a lawyer. I came
back to Croatia in 1995. When the Operation Flash and
Operation Storm military actions happened, I was mobilized to work as a lawyer. So, for the seven following
years, in addition to dancing, I worked at the Ministry of
Defense. I went through a variety of pretty high-ranking
positions there. I was even made head of certain departments, even ending up on the active military roster, with
the rank of First Lieutenant.
¬ When did you realize that dance would be your
profession? You also graduated from law school and
worked as a lawyer for a while.
Actually, ever since I was a child, I always said that
I would be a dancer and that it would be my only profession. I come from an artistic family: my mother and
father were artists as well, my mother was a movie editor, and my father a director. But circumstances did not,
unfortunately, work in my favor, and when I was thirteen
my grandmother became my legal guardian because I
was left parentless. With my grandmother taking care
of me and my sister, I could no longer be as involved
in dance as I wanted. Fear started inhibiting that desire.
In high-school, I chose a dance program for my final
two years, because it was possible at the time. The first
two and the second two grades were separate, with the
first two corresponding to a regular gymnasium and the
third and fourth grades consisting of a dance curriculum.
And so, after graduating high-school, I wanted to enroll
in a dance academy. However, my grandmother, as my
guardian, opposed this wholeheartedly, insisting on the
principle “First bring money to the table, then you can
dance”. When I finished high-school, I tried to figure out
if I had a special affinity for any courses, and ended up
enrolling in the Zagreb Faculty of Law. It was then that
I came to an agreement with my grandmother. I asked
her: “If I manage to graduate from law-school in time, and
if I am still eligible to audition for an academy abroad,
would you allow it then, would that be all right?” And
she said, “All right, if it really happens that way, I will
support you in your decision.” The fact that I graduated
¬ What was it like to work at t he Ministry of
Defense, considering your first love was dance?
I fit in nicely there. The discipline I was capable of
was very useful in that context. I was also involved with
things I never would have thought I could do. I worked
with the victims of the War of Independence, and that
was a subject I was very sensitive to. I worked as a lawyer
at the Ministry of Defense for seven years. I am very
proud of that, because I had the opportunity to learn a
lot there and meet some fantastic people. My so-called
disdain towards legal work, in a way, dissipated through
this, it is just the way it happened.
¬ Still, you quit your legal career?
At one point it became clear that I wanted to spend a
lot more time on my further artistic work. I also realized
that a person can only work and live the way I had been
living for a limited time, when one is younger. That was
when I made the decision; I was already involved with
performances and all of that, and I decided to apply for
the status of an independent artist quite late, in 2001. The
idea of being a dancer had existed from day one, from
the day I stepped into the Trešnja Theatre when I was a
little girl. In fact, there was no doubt for me. Only the
people around me doubted it would happen.
¬ Which performances did you see as a child? How
far do your early memories go? Do you remember
your own early performances in Trešnja Theatre or
do you remember some of the plays, dance works, or
operas that you went to with your parents and sister?
The first performances I remember were at the Croatian National Theatre and its white ballets; that was
probably where my idea of wanting to be a ballerina
originated. But soon after that I started watching the
performances of the Zagreb Dance Company and the
Studio – Contemporary Dance Company. That was also
a time where you could see contemporary dance performances at the Komedija Theatre. Those shows really
left a mark on me. I remember my experiences from
those days more like some sort of moving pictures than
like an actual experience. I remember that a particular
performance left a strong impression on me – Vlasta
Kaurić’s performance with the Zagreb Dance Company.
I still remember what the poster looked like; it was a
collaboration with artist Renata Chalupa-Prvan, and the
performance was called Siliton / Moving Art. It was one
of the first multi-media performances in the country. I
saw that multi-media performance when I was a little
girl, in 1977. The music was designed by Marko Ruždjak,
the movements choreographed by Vlasta Kaurić, and the
visuals were done by Vladimir Petek.
¬ Are there any dance performances that had an
impact on your own artistic work?
Since we never had the opportunity to see many foreign performances, and we couldn’t go abroad as much
as it is possible today, we were, in a way, pretty isolated.
I remember the first edition of the Dance Week Festival,
that was unbelievable for me, a true experience for me
and my sister. The two of us went through the entire
dance school together, and she has been involved in
dance her whole life; professionally, she has also graduated from every possible dance institution in Croatia.
We were in the same class for eight grades. Although she
is four years older than me, everybody in school always
kept telling me that I was the older Bogdanović sister.
After spending eight years together in the same classes,
even dancing together in some companies initially, she
was eventually drawn to medicine. She is now a specialist
anaesthesiologist.
¬ Which performances do you remember from the
Dance Week Festival?
I remember all the performances from the Dance
Week Festival; my sister and I would see all the performances, one after another, three shows per day, along
with all our other obligations. I remember being shocked
when I first saw Trisha Brown’s dancers: their speed was
incredible. I also remember József Nagy’s troupe, that
one stuck in my memory. I was also thrilled by Milko
Šparemblek’s Songs of Love and Death (Pjesme ljubavi i
86 _ Kretanja 23 | 24
smrti); I imagined that I would be able to dance that
way one day and thought that it would be wonderful; I
was fascinated.
But it was another dance work that was crucial for
my decision to study dance abroad: when the Gulbenkian Ballet performed at the Croatian National Theatre,
it was a choreography in which thirteen men opened
doors. The energy that could be felt when those thirteen
doors opened, and everything that followed it… I was so
fascinated, and the energy spilt over onto me. I thought,
“So that’s dance, when you’re sitting in the audience and
feel that energy, I want to study that, I want to create
that.” It was then that I decided: I would definitely go
and study it further. While we are on the subject of the
Gulbenkian: as it happens, two years ago I was at a dance
congress in San Marino, where I met a soloist who had
spent twenty years dancing at the Gulbenkian. He has his
own company in Portugal nowadays, and he was one of
the thirteen dancers. When he told me, “I know Milko
Šparemblek, I worked at the Gulbenkian,” and when he
told me how long he had worked there and mentioned
his performance in Zagreb, I just said “Thirteen doors,”
and he confirmed, “Yes, yes, thirteen doors.” An associate
of mine who was there at the time told me that she had
never seen me like that: for fifteen minutes I just sat
silently next to that man. It just happened: when your
entire life becomes connected, everything starts making
sense, this is it: you go back to the beginning.
¬ Which choreographers have you worked with?
Which of them had the greatest impact on your dance
creativity?
As far as my Croatian beginnings go, I would definitely like to mention Vlasta Kaurić, then Zaga Živković;
afterwards, I worked with some young choreographers,
such as Katarina Đurđević. In May 2003, Katarina
Đurđević and I choreographed the Stribor’s Forest (Šuma
Striborova) dance project at the Trešnja Theatre, while in
2006 I performed in the independent project Armchair
(Mekoslon), choreographed by Katarina Đurđević. I have
also worked with Larisa Lipovac: in June and July 2003 I
performed in the dance musical Myth of Labyrinth. I also
worked with Melita Spahić Bezjak on her 110 Quartet
of Two project in February 2014, in which I performed.
Of course, the importance of Milana Broš for my work
cannot be overstated, and I think working with her and
at the Chamber Ensemble of Free Dance influenced the
course of my future career and the path I would later
take. For example, my first guest performances with the
KASP stayed with me forever, especially Milana Broš’s
approach and professionalism; the way in which she
interview: Ana-Maria Bogdanović worked with the dancers is an important part of my
creative beginnings.
Later, in Belgium, when I worked with other choreographers, I kept coming back to something, let’s say,
original, the thing that inspired me to move on. So, a
long time before I went to the academy, I was interested
in Pina Bausch and dance theatre, so it seemed like the
next logical step. Over the three years at the Academy
in Belgium I intensively worked on acting, which was
one of the most important courses. Our professor Alain
Vautier later even taught at Béjart’s Academy in Lausanne
and elsewhere; he was very demanding and you could be
a fantastic dancer, but if you didn’t do what you had to
do in his classes, you would fail your exam. That might
have seemed unnecessary to the students at the time. I
didn’t think it was unnecessary even then, I appreciated
his work, even though it might have been the most difficult course I ever took during my studies. In fact, it was
very difficult to go through all of that with him, and I
think it is very important for any dancer or performer to
have such an education. I am very grateful for everything
he’s done with us. It was such a hard nut to crack, and
professor Alain Vautier framed it like that: should you be
doing this, is this really it? So every day, you would ask
yourself if you’ve made the right choice, if this was really
what you should be doing, and wondering if that really
was it. He made you doubt and question yourself, why,
how, where from… and those are important things that
you had to settle with yourself as a student.
¬ When we talk about your shows, and here I
include both your work as choreographer and as a
performer, what is your starting point and what kind
of subjects and dance are you interested in? You have
performed in the following projects: Limited Movement (Ograničen pokret, 2001), Hearing of the Eye
(Sluh oka, 2002), Myth of Labyrinth (2003), Armchair
(2006), Mauricio Kagel’s The Tribune (Tribun), Silvije
Foretić’s Fabularium Animale and Zoran Juranić’s
Penguins (Pingvini; all three directed by Andreas
Bode, 2007), I Am. (Jesam., 2008/2009), Who Took My
Cheewing Gum from An Ashtray?! (Tko mi je uzeo žvaku iz pepeljare?!, 2010/2011), Refractions (Refrakcije,
2011), Stroke/Invoke (Udar/Zaziv, 2012), Away from
Terror. Female Gesture in Response to Crisis. Theatre
of Empathy. Attempts (Od terora. Ženska gesta kao
odgovor na krizu. Kazalište empatije. Pokušaji, 2013),
Bodies Without. (Tijela bez., 2013), Seven (Sedam,
2013), 110 Quartet of Two (2014), In a Space Without.
(U prostoru bez., 2014) and in numerous TV shows on
Croatian and Belgian national television. You are also
the author of the following choreographies: The Tram
or Ways of Seeing (Tramvaj ili način gledanja, 2001),
Siliton or the New Moving Art (Siliton ili Nova Moving
Art, 2002), Stribor’s Forest (2003), Stranger, Who is
That? (Stranac, tko je to?, 2003), Electronic Afternoon
(Električno popodne), a project choreographed and
performed by saxophone player Claude Delangle at
the 22nd Music Biennale Zagreb (2003), In Us (U nama,
2006), I Am. (2007), Who Took My Cheewing Gum
from An Ashtray?! (2010), Refractions (2011), Stroke/
Invoke (2012), Away form Terror. Female Gesture in
Response to Crisis. Theatre of Empathy. Attempts
(2013), Bodies Without. (2013), Seven (2013), In a
Space Without. (2014). You are the author of scene
movement and choreography for the drama Nora or
a Doll’s House (2007) directed by Anja Maksić Japundžić. On what do you base your work?
In my creative work, I think I’ve been through different phases. At the beginning, my first full-length
choreography The Tram or Ways of Seeing was made for
a larger number of dancers, six or seven performers, and
I based a lot of my choreography on dance technique, on
the performing skill of the dancers, on their technical
preparedness. So, there was a certain theme that I was
working on, but, at the time, and it was pretty soon
after graduation, I was extremely fascinated with the
dancers’ technical performance. I was very interested in
that and I insisted on it. After several years of work, I no
longer had the chance to work with a large number of
dancers, because of the financial circumstances in which
we nowadays work. That is something that I might like
to do again: a show with a large number of performers.
At the same time, I would like to see how I would do
those same shows today and what I would care about
in the dancers’ performance. But, since, over time, I
increasingly started creating duo and then solo performances – although solo performances were a form I kept
avoiding and which I thought I did not like, so I did not
want to work in that way. But at a certain moment in
life I decided that I wanted to do a solo performance.
It was a couple of years ago when I performed Stroke,
with director Marina Petković Liker, and I think that
this is the point where the second part of my artistic
career took off, and the performances that followed
were: Stroke, Bodies Without. and In a Space Without.
It is a sort of a trilogy that took off in a completely
different direction. I wonder if this way of working is
the result of my work with Marina Petković Liker as a
director, or of the general place I currently find myself
in as a performer. It is probably both. But these days I
mostly start from the motion that is inside of me, the
88 _ Kretanja 23 | 24
interview: Ana-Maria Bogdanović silence that is within us all. I start from what is on the
inside, completely.
¬ You never create a choreography by starting from
an external form?
Nowadays, when I start creating a choreography, I
rarely start from an external form, from some sort of
outside framework, an outside idea. I primarily start from
what I feel and what I want to say. It is important for
every art form, and especially for dance, to communicate,
and that is what I am trying to achieve. I am trying to
show that everything is dance and everything is movement. In fact, we all dance, all the time, it’s just a matter
of how we present it. Every breath we take, in some way,
influences the people next to us. I am also interested in
the ways people who come to our performances perceive
choreography and dance; I am increasingly interested
in my responsibilities on the stage, in what I offer the
audience; but at the same time, I am interested in how
the person watching the performance receives what I
offer them. It is very important for me to convey something as a performer, to communicate something. It is
not that important for me to accurately convey the idea
that I had in my mind to someone, but merely that this
transfer happens. For example, Steven Iannacone used a
very harsh comparison in our first classes of the Basics
of Choreography course; when he gave us some minor
tasks and explained if we were performing them well or
not, he would say: “Look, you can perform something
and feel excellent while doing it, but if a person who
came to see it, with the intention of seeing it, feeling it
and getting something from you, if that viewer didn’t
experience any of it, that’s just masturbation on stage.”
Of course, I was very shocked to hear that, shocked by
his directness. And then he said: “And that is something
you can do at home.” It was just a little joke of his, but
I was quite shocked by what he had said, and perhaps I
didn’t fully agree with him at the time, but now I increasingly understand what he meant. I understand that there
are different kinds of choreographers who do different
things, quite opposite from what I do, and I really do see
a lot of performances and I like to see anyone’s work, but
I have to admit that, in every theatrical performance, be
it drama or dance, I find it very important to be able to
take something with me when I leave.
¬ Which collaborators do you work with most often,
and why?
Over the recent years I have been collaborating with
director Marina Petković Liker the most, because we
understand each other very well and I think that we com-
plement each other extremely well. I like to work, and
I have worked with different artists over the last couple
of years, including visual artists and musicians. In fact, I
love collaborating with people from other artistic fields,
because I think that it gives me freedom and breadth.
When I pick my collaborators, or when they pick me,
I think the most important thing is that we both have
room for further growth, that every rehearsal gives us the
possibility to learn from each other, to progress creatively
or in another aspect. I love new situations in which I fell
I am constantly learning something, in fact. If I could, I
would probably be a student my whole life, enrolling in
new schools and colleges, because I love it so much. And
I really love working with young people as well. As far as
collaborators go, there is also a contradiction at work: I
love working with consummate professionals, in various
forms of art, but I have dedicated a big part of my career
to working with amateurs.
¬ From 1997 to 2009 you were head of the Dance
Studio in the Ribnjak Youth Center. As the choreographer of the drama/dance project Stranger, Who
is That? you received an award for the best amateur theatre play in Zagreb, and a special award for
theatrical research at the 43rd Festival of Croatian
Theatre Amateurs in Karlovac in 2003. Why do you
like working with amateurs?
This other side of me is very interested in working
with someone who is still a raw material. I can get a
lot from that process, find a foundation in movement,
in motion in general. So I often find it very interesting
when someone who does not have much dancing experience enters my classroom. I find it interesting to see
original movement, something primal: the way we move.
From that, we can always return to the basics and once
again learn a lot. Another thing that is interesting to
me, because I teach Alwin Nikolais’ technique, is seeing
how quickly people who are, figuratively speaking, blank
slates, can progress if the technique is properly applied
on their bodies, how fantastically effective it is. In a very
short time you can get incredible movements from them,
after just a couple of years. With some people who are
casual amateurs in the world of dance, I managed to
produce dance performances in such a short time that I
myself couldn’t believe that I had led them to this.
¬ Which performances are you talking about?
For example, a show we recently staged, Bodies Without., was a collaboration between Maja Katić, an actress
with a certain prior knowledge of dance, Dejana Gobac,
who was once a ballerina at the Croatian National The-
atre, but is quite involved in conceptual and contemporary dance, and myself. I found it wonderful to work
with them, and that trio was an attempt to find that
natural movement. In fact, it was precisely the difference between the way my body had been trained, the
way Dejana’s body had been trained, and the way Maja
moved that was interesting all the time, developing and
creating interesting differences as well as a diverse whole;
that very counterpoint that we were creating. That was
exceptionally interesting, and it was a great challenge
and experiment for me, because I was constantly facing
new questions. For example, Maja kept asking me, “Why
do you want me, as an actress, in a dance project?” She
did not understand this, because the prevailing opinion
is still that dance is something highly aesthetic and that
high aesthetics is the only thing we strive for; however,
I think that I am increasingly interested in something
else, a certain imperfection in dance, and less and less
interested in achieving perfection.
¬ Now that you have mentioned the concepts of
perfection and imperfection, how would you define
dance in a Croatian context?
The context of dance in Croatia: now that is a question for a huge interview, for a big and special discussion
and analysis. However, I can be brief and say that more
and more things have been happening in Croatian dance
in the past decade or so, which doesn’t necessarily mean
that better things are happening. I remember a time
when I could see much better foreign performances in
Croatia than those available today. So, there is definitely
room enough to look back; not everything that came
before was bad, and not everything on display today is
brilliant; there is no guarantee that everything we do
today is good. I think the strategy that the independent
scene has adopted in these financial conditions has a tendency towards miniaturization, there is a hyper-production of small projects which aren’t given a long enough
run afterwards and which do not have the appropriate
production support. I am not sure that is the right way.
Back when there were three ensembles in total, we used
to say that it would be nice if we had another company,
and another, and another. Yes, that would have been
nice, but what we have today aren’t new dance companies like those that exist, for example, in Belgium, the
Netherlands and Germany; these are artistic organizations which receive funds for small projects. But they
do not have the logistics that are necessary for them to
create and perform. The small budgets these projects
receive are supposed to finance both the facilities where
we work and the venue where we will perform, so I
90 _ Kretanja 23 | 24
think that this type of funding and work, coupled with
the miniaturization of projects, cannot ensure continuous
and high-quality work. I think that forming a network of
artistic organizations, ensembles and institutions would
enable different working conditions, along with continuity, a thought-out strategy and, ultimately, visible results.
There is no transparent system of evaluation of artistic
work, more specifically, of did you create a high-quality
project: even if critics or the audience were the ones
to evaluate your work, I do not think that either the
former or the latter are taken into account. It does not
matter at all. You can make an effort and stage a whole
lot of performances, many more than you are bound to
by contract, and it will mean nothing and bring you no
guarantee that you will be able to get better funding for
a bigger project next year.
¬ Your husband, actor Maro Martinović, works at
the Zagreb Youth Theatre and is a member of the
famous theatre family Martinović from Dubrovnik.
Your daughter, Nea, is a fourth-grader who already
shows interest in dance and theatre. Your personal
and dance futures seem intertwined?
That is also an interesting question, t he future
of dance and my personal future. As an independent dance artist, a contemporary dancer who is now
forty-five years old, talking about a future is not that
simple, but I definitely see myself doing choreography
work in the future, I see myself teaching intensively, I
would like to work with a lot of people, and I would
love to work on a bigger project in which I could be
a part of somet hing bigger. I love my independent
work and I love those types of projects, but I really
yearn for a larger project in which I could be a cog in
the system, where everything would come together
as a larger whole in the end. I like collaborating and I
think this is exceptionally important for an artist: to
get an opportunity to work a lot with other, different
people. Time will tell how possible this will be, but I
will definitely go on down the path I’ve been treading,
which is a life-long learning about dance, because this
learning never stops. Just like Steven Iannacone told me
when I met him: dance is not just an art form: being a
dancer – it is a way of life. You do not become a dancer
when you enter the dance studio; you are a dance artist
from the moment you wake up to the moment you
go to sleep, from birth till death. It is simple: dance
is my life, and I will try to work as hard as I can, and
I hope that I will get the chance to work, because it
can be so hard to manage to get the opportunity to
do what you love and what you think you are. Every
interview: Ana-Maria Bogdanović day you convince yourself and believe in it, but you
need other types of support to make it all possible.
Everything dance-related makes me very happy, but
I think that I am in a phase where I’m conscious of
my need to work with others, to be a teacher. That
exchange of energy is extremely important. I cannot
be satisfied just with working on myself, by myself,
and I never could. I love working with young people, I
loved teaching at Ana Maletić’s School of Contemporary
Dance, and I feel very happy when I run into people
whom I taught at dance performances, people who
came to my dance studio as complete amateurs and
stayed for ten years, when I see that a small seed of
that is still here, that I managed to get them interested
in the idea of what dance really is, what it is that we
do, that I managed to get them involved in the way
they look at performances, all of that is very important
and it makes me very glad.
Mira Muhoberac is a dramaturge, theatrologist, univer-
ble discussions and workshops. As dramaturge, director and
theatre manager, and collaborating as artistic advisor and
language counselor, she has staged more than 140 shows
with the M&M Theatre, which she runs together with her
sister Vesna Muhoberac, as well as on the stages on every
theatre in Zagreb, at the Marin Držić Theatre in Dubrovnik,
the Dubrovnik Summer Festival and in almost every Croatian city. She has been awarded numerous Croatian and
International awards for science, arts, essays, education and
sport. As a student of the Academy of Dramatic Art and the
Faculty of Humanities and Social Sciences she was awarded
the Rector’s for excellence in her studies as well as for the
best academic paper and art performance, while, during her
teaching career, she has mentored 49 student projects, mostly
from the Faculty of Humanities and Social Sciences, that won
the Rector’s award. She is the founder of the Department for
Croatian Studies at the Charles University in Prague, where
she taught classes for three years. For fifteen years she has
been the co-author and co-director, with her sister Vesna
Muhoberac, of the Ragusini international project. On her
own, she is the director of the FEB international project (which
studies folklore and ethnographic heritage and organizes international symposia on the subject) in Dubrovnik, and acts
as a director or associate in numerous projects (such as the
HAZU’s Repertoar hrvatskih kazališta) both in Croatia and
abroad. For several years she worked as a researcher at the
HAZU’s Theatrology department.
sity teacher, director, and editor, with a degree in Croatian
language and literature and comparative literature, is actively
involved in the worlds of academic research, teaching and
art. After finishing elementary school in her home town of
Dubrovnik, she simultaneously graduated from high-school
and the art school for music and dance. From an early age
she was an active athlete, winning first places in national and
international swimming competitions. She graduated at the
Academy of Dramatic Art in Zagreb, and at the Faculty of
Humanities and Social Sciences in Zagreb, where she attained
her Ph.D. in addition to her doctoral studies at the Charles
University in Prague. She has designed and taught more than
fifty classes at the Faculty of Humanities and Social Sciences
in Zagreb, the Academy of Art in Osijek, Faculty of Humanities and Social Sciences in Pula, and the Centre for Croatian
Studies in Zagreb. She is the author and editor of more than
eighty books on dramaturgy, theatrology and education. She
was the editor of the Prolog, Novi Prolog, Dubrovnik, Kazališne novine and Mim magazines, and over the last couple of
years she has been the editor of the literary section of the
Vijenac magazine published by Matica Hrvatska. She has
published theatrical reviews, comments, essays, columns,
portraits and interviews for HRT, in HAZU’s Forum, and the
Kazalište, Hrvatsko glumište and Vijenac magazines. She
has participated in many academic conferences, symposiums,
seminars, both as a lecturer and as a moderator in round-ta-
predstava: Ti • razgovor:
Aleksandra Mišić i Ognjen Vučinić
predstava: Ti • razgovor: Aleksandra Mišić i Ognjen Vučinić < Ti, Foto: Krunoslav Marinac >
MAJA ĐURINOVIĆ
Sve dok ne
dodirneš sebe
IZVAN GRANICA
TIJELA
O predstavi Ti Plesne skupine Masa
A
leksandra Mišić plesačica je i umjetnička suvoditeljica Zagrebačkog plesnog ansambla te suosnivačica
i umjetnička ravnateljica Plesne skupine Masa. Plesnu edukaciju započela je u pulskom Plesnom studiju Zaro
polazeći balet te nastavila na brojnim domaćim i inozemnim
seminarima i ljetnim školama, među ostalim u londonskom
Labanovu centru i bečkom ImpulsTanzu, a Ismael Ivo, Rasmus
Ölme, Iztok Kovač, Robert Hylton, Francesco Scavetta, Rob
List, Damien Jalet, Bo Madvig neki su od umjetnika i pedagoga od kojih je učila. Isprva je surađivala u plesnim i dramskim
projektima u rodnoj Puli, potom pretežno djeluje na zagrebačkoj sceni. Od 1997. koreografira vlastite predstave (Crno i(li)
bijelo, Agonisis, Exit, Sva(t)kodnevno, Vještice, Prazna soba
na suncu, Skok u prazno), u Masi u suautorstvu s Ognjenom
Vučinićem (Randevu, Ništa nije krivo, Ti) te nekoliko koreografija u produkciji Zagrebačkoga plesnog ansambla (Tri
none zajedno s Vučinićem, PROmjene više autora) u kojem
od 2009. i pleše u svim predstavama ansambla. Dobitnica
je nekoliko nagrada za plesačka i koreografska ostvarenja,
posljednja je Nagrada hrvatskoga glumišta za najbolje plesno
ostvarenje u 2014. u predstavi Hermafroditi Žaka Valente.
Ognjen Vučinić plesač je i umjetnički suvoditelj Zagrebačkog plesnog ansambla te suosnivač Plesne skupine Masa.
Plesački put također počinje na baletnim satovima u studiju
Zaro, kao četverogodišnjak, te nastavlja na mnogim plesnim
radionicama, petnaest godina sudjelujući u svim produkcijama Zara. Koreograf Rajko Pavlić angažirao ga je 2000. u
projektu Ready Steady Go Plesnoga studija Liberdance, a od
2001. kao član Zagrebačkog plesnog ansambla pleše u svim
predstavama ansambla. U ZPA-u je i koreografski asistirao
na pojedinim predstavama (Interface Snježane Abramović
Milković) i koreografirao uz druge autore (5 do 12, Tri none,
PROmjene). U skupini Masa izvođački i autorski surađuje s
Aleksandrom Mišić te izvođački i u drugim projektima (Sjeme
Tamare Curić, Vjeverice na juriš i Vjeverice uzvraćaju udarac
Maje Drobac, AnaBela BelaAna Lilijane Resnick). Za svoj je
rad dosad primio tri Nagrade hrvatskoga glumišta i nekoliko
drugih nagrada.
predstava: Ti • razgovor: Aleksandra Mišić i Ognjen Vučinić
Potkraj listopada 2014. godine, skoro godinu dana nakon premijere u Zagrebačkom plesnom centru1 , predstava Ti autorsko-izvođačkog para Aleksandra Mišić i Ognjen
Vučinić osvojila je Grand prix na Međunarodnom festivalu
suvremenog plesa u Alžiru. Plesnim umjetnicima čestitao je
međunarodni žiri s veoma jednostavnom opaskom da je to
jedina predstava koja ih je bezrezervno ujedinila u istinski
snažnu, duboku dojmu.
Međunarodno priznanje vratilo je pozornost na predstavu
koja je pozitivno, ali nekako veoma diskretno popraćena bez
obzira na brojnost publike koja redovito prati rad Aleksandre
Mišić i Ognjena Vučinića, koji su kao plesači osim po jakoj
međusobnoj kompatibilnosti poznati i po visokoj tehnici i
energiji u smislu razvidne spremnosti scenskog davanja sebe.
Oni posjeduju neki neodoljivi, komunikativni, intuitivni tjelesni angažman koji publika (od)uvijek poštuje i cijeni i čemu
se, konačno, i raduje. No ovaj put krenuli su korak dalje,
nepredvidivo i iznenađujuće stišavajući se u kvantiteti i buri
tjelesnih reakcija, otvorili su prostor tople emocije i empatije,
nježna razumijevanja u zajedničkom trajanju.
Aleksandra Mišić i Ognjen Vučinić bliski su prijatelji i dugogodišnji plesni partneri. Veže ih Pula i petnaestak godina
rada u Plesnom studiju Zaro2 , oboje su članovi Zagrebačkog
plesnog ansambla, a 2008. pokreću Plesnu skupinu Masa
kao komorni, intimni prostor za dalja zajednička istraživanja pokreta. Već njihov autorski prvijenac Randevu osvaja
Nagradu kritike na Festivalu minijatura u Beogradu 2010.
Randevu počinje očito starom snimkom dvoje dražesne, silno koncentrirane, ozbiljne djece u točki na temu tanga, dok
ispod snimke čuči isti, ali već veliki dvojac u poziciji naizgled
nezainteresirana ali napeta međusobna iščekivanja. „Duet
je izgrađen u osluškivanju i prepoznavanju, dijalogu koji je u
stalnoj, hirovitoj promjeni osobnog stava i očekivanja spram
drugog te se tako stalno iznenađuju, nalaze i gube. Suosjećajno topli pa nezainteresirano hladni, nježni pa grubi, Mišić
i Vučinić dobro se poznaju i razumiju i zapravo kao velika
djeca samo nastavljaju davno započetu igru.”3
1
12. prosinca 2013. Predstava je nastala u produkciji Plesne
skupine Masa, uz potporu Hrvatskog instituta za pokret i ples u rezidencijalnom programu Zagrebačkog plesnog centra.
2
Studio za stvaralačke aktivnosti Zaro osnovan je 1991, a u
njemu je djelovao plesni studio pod vodstvom Slavice Šenk, koja
je u Pulu došla nakon pohađanja srednje baletne škole u Zagrebu
(od 1981. prvo djeluje kao baletna pedagoginja u Pionirskom domu
Slavko Grubiša). U Plesnom studiju Zaro realizirala je brojne cjelovečernje dječje predstave: Pepeljuga, Svinjar, Svjetokružna, Hi hi ha ha,
Labudasto jezero, Klauni, Trnoružica, Balet?, koje su izvođene diljem
Hrvatske i izvan granica, a uz brojna priznanja i nagrade Slavica
Šenk je kao voditeljica Plesnog studija Zaro 2001. odlikovana Redom
Danice hrvatske s likom Marka Marulića za iznimne uspjehe u radu.
3
Maja Đurinović, „Plesna nadigravanja”,
Plesnascena.hr, 7. kolovoza 2010, http://www.plesnascena.hr/index.
php?p=article&id=1142.
94 _ Kretanja 23 | 24
Randevu je bio javna evokacija uspomena i obilježenih 25 godina sudioništva na plesnom podiju. Pet godina
poslije Masa je izašla s predstavom Ti, drukčijom, nježnom, smirenom, čarobnom u svojoj toploj jednostavnosti
i skladu odnosa dvoje ljudi, koji izmiče klišeju uobičajena
erotski nabijena poimanja muško-ženskog odnosa. Naslov
Ti otvara više isprepletenih razina: plešem s tobom, tebi,
tobom, za tebe. I ako „plesati znači pokazati što mi ples
čini”4 , ovdje bih rekla: plesati udvoje znači pokazati što mi
ti činiš plesom. „Tijela bivaju prožeta, dirnuta onime što
čine”5 , onim što čine međusobno, u zajedničkom osjetu i
memoriji bivanja.
RAZGOVOR S ALEKSANDROM MIŠIĆ
I OGNJENOM VUČINIĆEM
(„Htio bih se vratiti toj ljubavi koju treba
ponovno izmisliti i braniti.”6 )
Š
to znači plesati s nekim 30 godina, ulaziti u dvoranu
s istom osobom? Što biste rekli jedno o drugome,
onako brzo, spontano, koji su to poznati vam, bliski
i dragi kapitali koje prepoznajete u drugome i koji vas drže
zajedno i pozivaju da krenete uvijek ponovno?
Vučinić: Alex je snažna i hrabra, brza, precizna, mekana.
Ona je za mene povjerenje i toplina, šašavost i lucidnost. U
svakom pogledu potpora i odlična – za podrške – ničeg se ne
boji, nije ju strah letjeti! Veoma je specifična situacija kad već
kao dijete imaš partnericu s kojom obavljaš zahtjevne zadatke
plešući. To nikad nije bila dječja igra, kao ni naš Tango, nego
ozbiljno bavljenje i kompleksni odnosi u smislu partnerstva.
Taj je odnos od početka bio očišćen, a opet smo plesom i
svim tim našim duetićima kao mali rješavali raznorazne situacije, i privatne…
Mišić: Ognjen ima savršenu fizičku prezenciju, divno ga
je vidjeti na sceni, kreće se jako skladno, ima prirodnu graciju.
Fascinantno je kako usprkos svojoj visini ekstremitetima barata silno brzo! I još kad se lomi na bezbroj dijelova… Može
biti i velik i malen, blag a opet žestok, ima jaku koncentraciju i pozornost, široki repertoarni dijapazon, nepredvidiv
je, otvoren, jako fleksibilan, poticajan. A kao partner? Ima
lakoću iznošenja ideje tijela, lakoću plesanja, komunikacije,
davanja i uzimanja prostora. Zapravo smo u pravoj fizičkoj
opoziciji, ali se u radu u paru te energije, kvalitete prenose i mi
se izjednačujemo. Negdje se to pretoči, nema više ekstrema,
kao da smo slični. Ostaje ono što nas povezuje, partnerstvo.
4
Stéphanie Aubin u Laurence Louppe, Poetika suvremenog plesa,
Hrvatski centar ITI, Zagreb, 2009, str. 22.
5
Laurence Louppe, Poetika suvremenog plesa, Hrvatski centar ITI,
Zagreb, 2009, str. 22.
6
Alain Badiou / Nicolas Truong, Pohvala ljubavi, Meandarmedia,
Zagreb, 2011, str. 89.
predstava: Ti • razgovor: Aleksandra Mišić i Ognjen Vučinić A plesali smo uvijek i stalno: u dvorani, izvan dvorane, nasred
ceste, bilo gdje.
Vučinić: Svaka situacija bila je dobra za isprobati nešto
novo! Kao, na primjer, šetalište Lungomare u nedjeljno poslijepodne, skuplja se sva mladež Pule, Alex i ja dolazimo
autom, otvaramo prtljažnik, puštamo glazbu i počinjemo
plesati nasred ceste, zaustavimo promet, a svi strpljivo čekaju da završimo.
Mišić: Kad je tamo bio neki zgodni bankin7 pa smo krenuli od situacija nogu, prešli na ruke i napravili cijelu koreografiju. A cesta je bila jednosmjerna i stvarno su svi mirno
čekali da završimo i onda nam pljeskali… Imali smo dvadesetak godina i znala nas je cijela Pula, plesali smo posvuda.
I sa studijem Zaro i sami. Jako mladi prošli smo rijedak režim
discipline i očekivanja. To nije usporedivo s tečajevima za
djecu, rekreativnom, veselom zabavom, sa Slavicom Šenk
to nije bilo moguće. Ta strast i usredotočenost koje su se
od nas očekivale bile su na razini profesionalnog plesača.
Nije bilo nikakve razlike u pristupu. Pogotovo kad si ušao
u izabranu grupu, bio si pun strahopoštovanja i želje da
to vratiš i stalno u pogonu, u funkciji predstave, a ne neko
dijete koje se igra…
Meni je bilo važno kako je usmjeravala naš talent. Nije
nam nikad rekla da smo nadareni, nego nas je neopazice
usmjeravala. Nije bilo šanse da se netko ubaci u ulogu dive!
Individualno nam je pristupala, zato i jesmo izašli tako različiti
u konačnici 8 , trebalo je naći što nas otvara, otkriti gdje smo
stali, na čemu trebamo raditi kao izvođači, glumci, plesači…
Da sve ide iz nas. Moralo se stalno raditi na sebi, a ona je
podmetala situacije: dođeš nabrijan, pun energije, a mi –
meditiramo! Ili, baš bi se iskakao, a vježbamo tai chi! Kakav
tai chi?! Ono što će te izbalansirati…
Vučinić: Alex je u ovom trenutku apsolutno zrela, ima
moć iskazivanja priče tijelom, a da ništa ne kaže. Imam
dojam da smo sad u obrnutom procesu. Silna energija koju
smo još kao klinci pokazivali, koja je i dalje iskrena i naša,
sad se lagano okreće i čini mi se da se bavimo čistim emocijama, onim što nas pere iznutra. Sad mi se čini da se
bez problema možemo tjelesno transformirati ne trošeći
toliko energije. Zanimljive su mi te naše transformacije,
recimo da je to najveća promjena. Dobro, sad sam već
dobio sliku o tome kakav sam, odnosno znam što i kako
jesam na sceni, ali kako to promijeniti u različitim projektima ili predstavama, ulazi u neku drugu priču. Želim raditi
na transformacijama.
7
Bankin, bankina, rubni dio ceste koji štiti kolnik od oštećenja.
8
Iz Plesnog studija Zaro osim A. Mišić i Vučinića izašli su još
Roberta Milevoj, Matija Ferlin, Elda Kosanović, Andreja Gotovina.
¬ Razumijem, oboje ste znani kao vrsni plesači i kad vas
netko zove u projekt, u principu vas zove iz te pozicije poznatoga i očekivanoga: atraktivni, brzi i žestoki! Na neki
način i ovaj je projekt tako započeo. Snimili ste vizualnu
građu, spot na poeziju Enesa Kiševića 9 . Kakve ste upute
dobili? Pretpostavljam da vas nisu pozvali u neko novo
istraživanje, nego zbog onog što fizički nosite, što se zna
da plesački jeste?
Mišić: Pa da, uputa je bila: passion, strastveno, pomalo
erotsko, zapravo ono što jesmo u energiji, pa kao malo strastvenije. I to onda u zadanom prostoru s jasnim smjerovima
putova, naprijed-natrag, gore-dolje i lijevo-desno.
Vučinić: U početku nismo ni čuli poeziju, nju je autor
poslije pridružio. Dobili smo upute i glazbu, nešto kao dva
lava puštena u sobu i – kreni! Snimili smo u dva puta, prvi
put s glazbom, drugi put i s poezijom i onda je već bilo
dosta građe.
Mišić: Bilo je jako zanimljivo: krenuli smo snimati i, dobro, očekivali su ples, ali nisu ga baš očekivali među prljavim
ciglama u staroj vojarni, među izmetom štakora. A mi udarili
u šou, šou! Meni se otkopčalo dugme, a snimatelja je uhvatila
panika da ćemo zaustaviti i da će mu nestati taj trenutak, bio
je to naboj koji šiba svagdje, a kako to nije koreografija, tako
je mislio da će sve nestati. Ali nije, možemo mi još!
Vučinić: Kad snimamo malo zahtjevnije stvari, u koje se
bacimo, dogodi nam se da poslije nemamo pojma kako smo
to izveli. Drugi pokušaj obično je sladoled: samo se otopi…
Mišić: Ali krenuli smo raditi predstavu neovisno o građi
za taj spot. Željeli smo napraviti plesni duet i nismo forsirali
ni poeziju ni video, koji je bio nadahnjujući, ali nikako nije
bio početak rada, čekali smo da mu se dogodi mjesto. Video
je bio odlična građa koju ne bismo mogli ponoviti i odličan
medij, ljudi koji su ga radili bili su iznimno profesionalni. I
super nam je bilo da tu energiju koju ljudi očekuju od nas,
kako nas vole vidjeti, vide gore! Na projekciji. A htjeli smo
isprobavati nešto posve drukčije, tražili smo neki drugi poticaj, iz svega i svačega, raznoraznih igara, slika, baš smo se
igrali kao djeca…
Vučinić: Točno se sjećam jedne probe. Bilo je stvarno
teško: čime ćemo se baviti?! Jesmo malo luckasti, pa hoćemo li tog tipa ili nekog drugog ili… i onda iz neke ljutnje i
frustracije jednog dana, ma u jednom popodnevu, nastao je
komad, mislim, u idejnom smislu. Znali smo da je to – to! To
ćemo dalje razrađivati!
Mišić: Čak bih rekla da su neke stvari istisnute frustracijom, ali ne frustracijom tipa jao ne znam što ću, nego fru-
9
Interpretacija poezije: Robert Kurbaša; glazba: Max Richter;
kamera: Darko Drinovac; video: Ivan Slipčević; kostimi: Ljerka
Zmajić, oblikovanje zvuka: Tomica Kraljić, oblikovanje svjetla:
Milan Kovačević.
predstava: Ti • razgovor: Aleksandra Mišić i Ognjen Vučinić
stracijom istošću. To što sam sebe ponavljaš, što si često u
veoma sličnim šablonama pa se stalno ponavljaš. I dogodilo
nam se da ne možemo smisliti još jedan takav prepoznatljiv
duet! Što možemo nas dvoje što drugi ne mogu? Fizički, svi
mogu što i mi, nema razlike, hoćemo li preskočiti drugog ili
naskočiti na njega, sve je jednako, nismo se mi bitno pomaknuli. Iz te frustracije ponavljanja izrodio se Ti: ušli smo u
koncentraciju, srž, i onda smo zaplivali i odatle je kao zoom
in došao pokret, dva, tri, četiri i odlično, manje je više. Išli
smo na tu formulu. S toliko godina iskustva i toliko poznavanja tijela imaš kompas za vrijeme, koliko možeš izdržati
neku građu, što propada i nema smisla, a što stoji i može se
razvijati dalje. Ako imaš adute da nastaviš, onda to vjerojatno
jest i izvana tako. Važno je to što nosiš. Pozvali smo na kraju
još neke ljude za savjet, korekcije. Zanimljivo je kako neke
finese, mali pokret ili samo promjena žarišta, mogu totalno
promijeniti doživljaj, scenarij.
¬ Predstava počinje silno poetično, simbolično, laganim nježnim puhanjem bijelog praha, uzajamnim zaprašivanjem, zamagljivanjem, potiče neko intuitivno
prepoznavanje… U slow motionu izvođači se dižu sa
stolica i otvaraju jednostavnu, čistu dijagonalu, koju
uvijek ponovo opisuju različitim oblicima podupiranja,
guranja, nošenja, ukratko, svladavanja prostora. Jednako
tako jednostavno on uzima bijelu suknju i lagano joj je,
96 _ Kretanja 23 | 24
kao djetetu, priprema i oblači, a onda oblači nju u suknji, odnosno ona najednom izraste poput Alice koja je
upravo pojela čarobni kolačić. Plesačica i plesač jedno
su, a na njihovu spoju, bijeloj širokoj suknji, projicira se
dio videa, nestvarno, plavičasto, kao reminiscencija i
scenska anticipacija.
Mišić: Kako smo došli do praha? Ne znam. Koja je asocijacija bila? Znam samo da smo, kad smo to prvi put napravili,
shvatili da smo se na neki način poništili, svoju prezenciju,
kao da imamo filtar, kao da to više nisu samo naša tijela, u
startu smo ih poništili, lica, ali i tijela, i to je značilo da se
možemo početi drukčije igrati…
Vučinić: Zanimljivo je slušati različite komentare kao bacanje emocija, slavlje našeg prijateljstva, ali nama je to bilo
čišćenje nas kakvi jesmo. I neka budu mrlje i nezgodno nam
se kliže, ali odbacilo nas je u nešto drugo!
Mišić: Između nas je igra koja je posve ozbiljna, ali ono što
nastane iz igre može otići bilo kamo, nije napravljeno napamet, iz neke konstrukcije. A slow motion je divan, toliko toga
kaže, ako to uspiješ pravo izvesti. I na klasičnu glazbu – podsjeća me na Larsa von Triera! Zanimalo me bi li te unutarnje
stvari mogle izaći i na sceni, da se dogodi neka druga ljepota,
neka druga pozornost, neka druga vrsta usredotočenosti,
nešto drukčije od čisto fizičkog plesa i kombinacija varijacija.
A kostim nam je jednom donijela naša producentica.
Gledali smo tu suknju i onda je Ogi rekao: hajde, popni
predstava: Ti • razgovor: Aleksandra Mišić i Ognjen Vučinić se. Sjela sam mu na ramena, a on se počeo igrati. Iz te
totalno naše igre, načina na koji mi to radimo, isprobavamo: a što bi bilo kad bih sad ja, uđemo u finese. Nema
velike filozofije.
Vučinić: Inače volim tako raditi, baciti se u nešto, pa onda
tražiti, onako iskonski, iskreno. I točno se osjeti trenutak, ako
se već dohvatimo neke zajedničke građe, osjeti se trenutak
kad se nešto zbiva ili kad je nešto nepotrebno ili glupo. Građa
koja je dobra naspram svega što imamo, opstaje.
¬ Nakon lagana, pozorna plesuckanja u naglašenoj vertikali visoka Alica spušta se na koljena kad polako, tijekom
kružnog puzanja dolazi do odvajanja, odnosno udvajanja i
razdvajanja. Plesačica se diže i nastavlja neobično klizeće
kruženje uz neočekivane trzaje glave i impulse ruku, sve
dok je plesač naglo ne zaustavi.
Vučinić: Da, „ludo jedna, prestani”!
kad se osjećamo najbliže, kad smo posve ogoljeni i možemo
očitati gdje smo i što smo.
Mišić: Na kraju nam se dogodi pročišćenje, suze, pogotovo kad dugo nismo u kontaktu, valjda od silne napetosti,
pa sve izađe, sve što nosimo u sebi.
Vučinić: Predstava je uvijek poprilično jednako nabijena, inače
mi se ne događa da si na sceni dopustim trenutak da tako nešto
izađe iz mene, ali to ovdje ionako nitko ne vidi. Kad krene posljednja glazba i ponovno u laganu hodu doživim sliku našeg odnosa,
počinju mi glavom prolaziti sve naše slike i počne mi se vrtjeti…
Mišić: Ja imam slike! Ono kad smo skakali kolut u maloj
dvorani bez strunjače, pokušali smo se zaletjeti, jako visoko
i daleko skočiti i napraviti kolut: ateriranje na glavu! Kad smo
snimali emisiju u studenom na -5° C, a ja imala temperaturu
41° C! Ti i ja 1986. na klupi. A kad si cijelu noć spavao ispod
madraca, a mi smo te tražili?
Vučinić: Nekako kad se istodobno preklope život i ples,
jednostavno – pukneš.
¬ Zaustavljena je u jednoj lijepoj podršci, nekoj vrsti zagrljaja u kojem visi poput lutke.
Mišić: To je slika iz jednog stripa koju nosim u džepu već
godinu dana, silno mi je bilo dojmljivo kako ju drži i odnos
koji iz toga proizlazi i htjela sam već prije to upotrijebiti, ali
nije sjelo u prošlu predstavu, a ovdje je ta slika dobila svoje
mjesto, zaživjela.
¬ I onda ta žena/lutka bude protresena i nekako se dogodi
obrat. Preuzima njegovo tijelo, koje kroz zagrljaj prelazi u
pietu, i onda ga meko polaže na pod. Ona se smiruje, a on
kreće u impulse, trzaje, neku muku tijela.
Vučinić: Tu imam svoju priču o odrastanju, egzorcizmu,
pusti me!
Mišić: Pokret mu se osniva na emocijama, kreće iz srčane
čakre, ide kroz tijelo koje se bori i ne zna kako bi to pustilo
van. U njegovu fizikusu to izgleda toliko moćno, a toliko je
malo, nema histerije, samo emocija koja ne zna bi li van ili
unutra, traži izlaz kroz kralješnicu, kroz zdjelicu, kroz noge ili
glavu. To je primarni pokretač u tom malom solu.
¬ Ona ga laganim polaganjem dlana na prsni koš smiruje, a onda položi i glavu, legne uz njega u zagrljaju i tako
miruju, blago vidljivi ili više naslutivi u mraku uz projekciju
videa i stihove Enesa Kiševića: „Napisat ću ti pjesmu / U
kojoj će biti / Sunce, vjetar i ti. Pjesma završava: Sve dok
ne dodirneš / sebe / Izvan granica tijela”.
I na kraju sneno buđenje, opipavaju jedno drugomu
lice poput slijepih, pa onda ruke, kožu, kao u transu, kao
da su se našli nakon dugo, dugo vremena i sad će konačno
i zauvijek zaplesati…
Vučinić: Da, to je iskustvo koje pogađa i poprilično je teško ostati profesionalnim posljednjih dviju minuta, u trenutku
Maja Đurinović (rođena Zalar 1960. u Zagrebu) završila je Klasičnu gimnaziju, Školu za ritmiku i ples i studij
jugoslavenskih jezika i književnosti na Filozofskom fakultetu
u Zagrebu. Profesionalno se bavi plesom: petnaestak godina
izvođački (u Komornom ansamblu slobodnog plesa Milane
Broš i Gesti), poslije kao pedagoginja, koreografkinja i suradnica za scenski pokret. Objavljuje tekstove pedagoške,
kritičke, povijesne i opće plesnoteorijske problematike; autorica je knjiga iz područja povijesti hrvatskog plesa Mercedes
Goritz Pavelić, Mia Čorak Slavenska, Razvoj suvremenog
plesa: Ana Maletić, životopis te interaktivne multimedijske
prezentacije Kaspomanija Milane Broš. Osnovna je tema
njezinih istraživanja ples u Hrvatskoj između dvaju ratova, o
čemu drži predavanja i prezentacije; segment plesa priredila
je za izložbe Avangardne tendencije u hrvatskoj umjetnosti i
Strast i bunt – ekspresionizam u Hrvatskoj, sudjelovala je na
Krležinim danima s temom Hrvatska pera u apologiji plesnog
teatra, objavila Vera Milčinović – Tashamira Dances of Reality
and Unreality u Feminine Future. Perfomance, Dance, War,
Politics and Eroticism Adriena Sine. Članica je uredništva
časopisa za plesnu umjetnost Kretanja i urednica portala
Plesnascena.hr. Zaposlena u zvanju izvanrednog profesora
na Umjetničkoj akademiji u Osijeku.
< You, Photo: Krunoslav Marinac >
performance You • interview:
Aleksandra Mišić i Ognjen Vučinić
performance You • interview: Aleksandra Mišić i Ognjen Vučinić MAJA ĐURINOVIĆ
Until You
Touch Yourself
OUTSIDE THE
BOUNDARIES OF
THE BODY
On the show You (Ti) by the Masa Dance Company
A
leksandra Mišić is a dancer and artistic co-director
of the Zagreb Dance Company, and co-founder
and artistic director of the Masa Dance Company. Her dance education began at Pula’s Zaro Dance
Studio, where she studied ballet, and continued at numerous seminars and summer schools both in Croatia and
abroad, among others, at the Laban Centre in London
and the ImpulsTanz in Vienna; Ismael Ivo, Rasmus Ölme,
Iztok Kovač, Robert Hylton, Francesco Scavetta, Rob List,
Damien Jalet, Bo Madvig are some of the artists and
teachers she has learned from. At first, she collaborated
in dance and drama performances in her hometown of
Pula, and after that she has mostly worked in Zagreb.
Since 1997, she has been choreographing her own performances (Black and/or White /Crno i(li) bijelo/, Agonisis,
Exit, Every(bo)d(a)y /Sva(t)kodnevno/, Witches /Vještice/, An
Empty Room in the Sunlight /Prazna soba na suncu/, Leap
of Faith /Skok u prazno/), at the Masa Dance company,
co-authored with Ognjen Vučinić (Rendezvous /Randevu/,
Nothing is Wrong /Ništa nije krivo/, You /Ti/) as well as
working on several choreographies in the production
of the Zagreb Dance Company (The Three Grannies /Tri
none/ with Vučinić, Changes /PROmjene/ with several
co-authors) in which she has been dancing since 2009,
in all the Company’s performances. She has won several
awards for dance and choreography achievements, the
last one being the Croatian Actors’ Guild Award for Best
Dance Performance for Žak Valenta’s 2014 performance
Hermaphrodites of the Soul (Hermafroditi duše).
Ognjen Vučinić is a dancer and artistic co-director of
the Zagreb Dance Company, as well as the co-founder
of the Masa Dance Company. His story as a dancer also
performance You • interview: Aleksandra Mišić i Ognjen Vučinić
began with ballet classes at the Zaro Studio, when he
was four, and went on through numerous dance workshops, participating for fifteen years in all productions
of the Zara Studio. Choreographer Rajko Pavlić hired
him in 2000 for Liberdance Dance Studio’s Ready Steady
Go project, and since 2001 he has performed in every
performance of the Zagreb Dance Company as a fullfledged member of the company. During his time at
the ZPA, he also assisted as a choreographer on certain
performances (Snježana Abramović’s Interface) and choreographed alongside other authors (5 to 12, The Three
Grannies, Changes). At the Masa Dance Company, he has
collaborated with Aleksandra Mišić as an author and
performer, and has performed in other projects as well
(Tamara Curić’s Seed /Sjeme/, Maja Drobac’s Squirrels on
the Loose /Vjeverice na juriš/ and Squirrels Strike Back /
Vjeverice uzvraćaju udarac/, and Liliana Resnik’s AnaBela
BelaAna). He has been awarded three Croatian Actors’
Guild Awards for his work.
In late October 2014, almost a year after its premiere
at the Zagreb Dance Center1 , the performance You by
authors and performers Aleksandra Mišić and Ognjen
Vučinić won the Grand prix at the International Cultural
Festival of Contemporary Dance in Algiers. These dance
artists were congratulated by the international festival
jury, with a simple remark that it was the only performance at the festival which unequivocally united them
under a truly powerful, deep impression.
This international recognition has brought some
attention back to the show, which had been accepted
positively, but somewhat understatedly, in spite of the
size of the audience which has been regularly following
the work of Aleksandra Mišić and Ognjen Vučinić, who
are, in addition to their mutual compatibility as dancers,
known for their exceptional technique and energy and
their striking readiness to give everything on the stage.
They possess a certain irresistible, communicative, intuitive bodily commitment that the audience has always
respected and admired, and, ultimately, looked forward
to. But this time, they have taken a step forward, unpredictably and surprisingly toning down the quantity and
ferocity of their bodily reactions, and thereby opening
up a space of warm emotion of empathy, of a gentle
mutual understanding.
Aleksandra Mišić and Ognjen Vučinić are close friends
and long-time dance partners. They are brought together
1
On December 12th, 2013. The show was created by the Masa
Dance Company, with the support of the Croatian Institute for
Movement and Dance as part of the Zagreb Dance Center residence
program.
100 _ Kretanja 23 | 24
by the town of Pula and fifteen years of work at the Zaro
Dance Studio2 ; they are both members of the Zagreb
Dance Company, and in 2008 they founded the Masa
Dance Company as an intimate, chamber space for their
further joint exploration of motion. Their authorial debut
Rendezvous won the Critics’ Choice Award at the 2010
Belgrade Festival of Choreographic Miniatures. Rendezvous begins with an obviously old tape of two lovely,
immensely concentrated and serious children in the
middle of a tango-style dance routine, while the same –
but already grown up – pair sit beneath the footage, in
a position of apparently disinterested but tense mutual
anticipation. “The duet was built through listening and
recognizing, a dialogue which is in a constant, whimsical
state of change of personal attitudes and expectations
from the other, so they keep surprising, finding and
losing each other. Compassionately warm then disinterestedly cold, gentle and then harsh, Mišić and Vučinić
know and understand each other well, in essence continuing, like big children, a game started a long time ago.”3
Rendezvous was a public evocation of memories marking 25 years of collaboration on the dance floor. Five
years later, Masa produced You, a different, gentle, calm
performance, magical in its warm simplicity and harmony
of the relationship of two people, which avoided the
usual cliché of a man-woman relation loaded with erotic
tension. The title You opens up several interwoven levels:
I dance with you, to you, through you, for you. And
if “dancing means showing what dance does to me”4 , I
would say that here, dancing in two means showing what
you do to me through dance. “The bodies become permeated and touched with what they do”5 , by what they do
to each other, in a common feeling and memory of being.
2
The Zaro Studio for Creative Activities was founded in 1991, and
its dance studio was run by Slavica Šenk, who moved to Pula after
attending the School for Classical Ballet of Zagreb (since 1981, she
had been working as a ballet teacher at the Slavko Gruiša Pioneer
Center). At the Zaro Dance Studio, she has staged numerous feature
shows for children: Cinderella /Pepeljuga/, The Swineherd /Svinjar/,
Worldaround /Svjetokružna/, Hi hi ha ha, Swanlike Lake /Labudasto
jetero/, Clowns /Klauni/, Sleeping Beauty /Trnoružica/, Ballet? /Balet?/, which have been performed at home and abroad. In addition to
numerous awards and acknowledgments, Slavica Šenk, as head of the
Zaro Dance Studio, was awarded the Order of Danica Hrvatska for her
achievements in culture.
3
Maja Đurinović, „Plesna nadigravanja”, Plesnascena.hr,
August 7th, 2010, http://www.plesnascena.hr/index.
php?p=article&id=1142.
4 Stéphanie Aubin in Laurence Louppe, Poetics of Contemporary
Dance.
5
Laurence Louppe, Poetics of Contemporary Dance.
< You, Photo: Krunoslav Marinac >
performance You • interview: Aleksandra Mišić i Ognjen Vučinić Movements 23 | 24 _ 101
A CONVERSATION WITH ALEKSANDRA
MIŠIĆ AND OGNJEN VUČINIĆ
(“I would like to return to that love,
which needs to be rediscovered and defended.”6 )
W
hat does it mean to dance with someone
for 30 years, to enter the studio with the
same person? What would you say to each
other, off the bat, spontaneously; what is that familiar,
fond capital that you recognize in each other and
that keep you together, inviting you to start all over
again every time?
Vučinić: Alex is strong and brave, quick, precise, soft.
She is, for me, trust and warmth, wackiness and lucidity.
She supports me in every way, and what is excellent is that
she doesn’t fear anything, she is not afraid to fly! It is a
very specific situation to have, ever since your childhood, a
partner with whom you perform difficult dancing tasks. It
was never a child’s play, and neither was our Tango; it was
always a serious undertaking and a complex partnership.
That relationship was pure from the start, and yet again,
as children, through dance and our little duets, we solved
various situations, including private ones…
Mišić: Ognjen has the perfect physical presence, it is a
delight to see him on the stage, he moves so harmoniously,
he has a natural grace. It is fascinating that, despite his
height, he moves his limbs so quickly. And then when
he breaks into countless pieces… He can be big or small,
gentle yet fierce, he is very concentrated and alert, has
a wide scope, he is unpredictable, open, very flexible,
stimulating. And as a partner? He has a certain clarity
when relaying a physical idea, a lightness in his dance,
communication, giving and taking space. Actually, we are
a real physical contrast, but when working as a pair, these
energies and qualities transfer over, and we level out. It
spills over somewhere, there are no more extremes, it is
as if we are similar. What is left is what connects us, our
partnership. And we have danced always and constantly:
in the studio, outside, in the middle of the road, anywhere.
Vučinić: Every situation is a good opportunity to try
something new. For example, the Lungomare walkway in
Pula on a Sunday afternoon, where all the young people
gather; Alex and I drive there, open up the trunk of the
car, play some music, and start dancing in the middle
of the street, stopping the traffic, and everybody waits
patiently for us to finish.
Mišić: We would find an interesting curb, start with
our feet, move over to our arms and hands and create a
6
Alain Badiou / Nicolas Truong, In Praise of Love.
102 _ Kretanja 23 | 24
whole choreography. And it was a one-way street, and
everyone really waited for us to be finished, and then
applauded us… We were twenty-something and the
whole town knew us, we danced everywhere. Both with
the Zaro studio and on our own. At a very young age we
went through a rare regime of discipline and expectation.
It is not comparable to junior classes or recreational,
fun dancing; that wasn’t possible with Slavica Šenk. The
passion and focus that were expected from us were on a
professional level. There was no difference in approach.
Especially if you were in the selected group, you were
filled with awe and a desire to repay that confidence. You
were always in action, in function of the performance;
you were never just some child at play…
For me, the way she directed our talent was important. She never told us we were gifted, she just gave us
directions without us noticing it. There was no chance
that someone could assume the role of a diva! She
approached us individually, that is the reason why we
eventually ended up so different7 , we needed to find
what it was that opened us up, discover where we were
halted, what we needed to work on as performers, actors,
dancers… to let everything come out of us. Constant work
on ourselves was needed, and she would set up situations
for us: you come to the studio all hyped up, full of energy,
and then you are told to meditate! Or you want to jump
around, and you are told to do tai chi! What do you mean,
tai chi?! Whatever balances you out…
Vučinić: Alex is now absolutely mature, she has the
power to tell a story through her body, without saying
a word. I believe we are now in an inverse process. All
that energy we demonstrated back when we were kids,
which is still honest and ours, is gradually turning the
other way, and it seems to me that nowadays we deal
in pure emotion, on what’s going on inside. I feel like
we can now transform our bodies more easily, without
spending all that energy. I find these transformations
to be interesting, I would say that has been the biggest
change. So, now I have an idea of what I am, or what I am
and do on stage; but changing this in different projects
of performances, that is another story altogether. I want
to work on transformations.
¬ I understand. Both of you are known as excellent
dancers, so when you are invited to join a project, you
are basically a known and expected quality: attractive,
fast and furious! In a way, that was the way this
7
The Zaro Dance Studio, aside from A. Mišić and O. Vučinić, was
also the place where Roberta Milevoj, Matija Ferlin, Elda Kosanović
and Andreja Gotovina studied.
performance You • interview: Aleksandra Mišić i Ognjen Vučinić project started as well. You taped the visuals, a video
set to the poetry of Enes Kišević8 . What instructions
did you get? I assume that you were not invited to
explore, but to provide your physicality, your wellknown dancing qualities?
Mišić: Well, yes, the instructions were: passion, a bit
of eroticism, in fact, the energy we carry anyway, just
done a bit more passionately. All of this in a set space
with clear directions of movement, back-forth, up-down
and left-right.
Vučinić: In the beginning we didn’t even hear the
poetry, the author added it later. We only had the instructions and music, something like two lions released into
a room – and off we went! We recorded it in two takes,
once with music, then with poetry as well, and that
provided us with plenty of material.
Mišić: It was very interesting: we started recording
and… well, they expected dance, but they didn’t really
expect a dance in the midst of dirty bricks in an old
barracks, among rat droppings. And we gave them a real
show, a show, I tell you! One of my buttons flew loose,
and the cameraman panicked, thinking we would stop
and that the moment would go away, it really was an
electric charge, all over the place. Since it had not been
choreographed, he thought we would lose all of it. But
we didn’t, we still have plenty to give!
Vučinić: When we record some of our more challenging projects, those we throw ourselves into, it can happen
that we later have no idea how we did it. Any attempt of a
repeat performance is like ice-cream: it just melts away …
Mišić: But we started creating this performance independently from the video material. We want to do a
dance duet and we never forced poetry or the video,
which was inspiring, but was by no means the starting
point of our work; we waited for a place for it to just happen. The video was a great source of material, something
we couldn’t reproduce, and an excellent medium, the
people who worked on it were extremely professional.
And it was great to see the energy that people expect
and love to see from us, up there! Projected. And we
wanted to try something completely different, we were
looking for a different kind of inspiration, from any and
all places, games, images… we really played like children.
Vučinić: I distinctly remember one rehearsal. It was really
difficult: what are we going to work on? We were feeling
wacky, it was hard to make up our minds… and then, from
some pent-up anger and frustration, one day, in one after-
8
Interpretation of poetry: Robert Kurbaša; music: Max Richter;
camera: Darko Drinovac; video: Ivan Slipčević; costumes: Ljerka Zmajić, sound design: Tomica Kraljić, lighting design: Milan Kovačević.
noon, the piece was created, the idea behind it. We knew
that was it! That would be what we were going to work on.
Mišić: I would even say that some things were forced
out through our frustration; not frustration in the sense
of oh my, I don’t know what to do, but a frustration with
sameness. With repeating yourself, with being locked in
very similar patterns and repeating yourself. It came to be
that we couldn’t stand to do another typical duet! What can
the two of us say that others cannot? Physically, everybody
can do the things we do, there is no difference, whether we
leap over each other or jump onto one another, that is all the
same, we haven’t made any significant progress. Out of that
frustration, You was born: we went deep into concentration,
into the marrow, and we swam in it; from there, just like
zooming in, we had one movement, then two, three, four
– excellent, less is more. We adopted that formula. With
so many years of experience and knowing your body, you
develop a compass for time; how long you can withstand a
certain material, what won’t work and doesn’t make sense,
and what does and can be further developed. If you have a
justification to carry on, it will probably be seen that way
from the outside as well. What is important is what you
carry. In the end, we asked some people to provide us with
advice, with corrections. It is interesting how certain finesses,
slight motions or just a shift in focus can completely change
your experience and the whole scenario.
¬ The performance begins very poetically, symbolically, with a gentle blowing of a white powder, a
mutual blurring and fogging which inspires an intuitive recognition… In slow motion, the performers
stand up from their chairs and open up a simple,
clean diagonal, which they re-trace over and over
again through various forms of supporting, pushing,
carrying, in short, conquering space. In a similarly
simple way, he takes a white skirt and, as if for a
child, prepares it and puts it on her; then, she suddenly grows, like Alice after eating a magic cookie.
The two dancers are one, and on their link, the wide
white skirt, a part of the video is projected, a surreal,
bluish reminiscence and anticipation.
Mišić: How did we come up with the dust? I don’t
know. What was the association? I only know that, when
we did it for the first time, we realized that we had in a
way annulled our presence, as if we had formed a filter,
as if they were no longer just our bodies; we annulled
them, our faces and our bodies, and that meant we could
start to play differently…
Vučinić: It is interesting to hear different comments
on it; a casting out of emotions, a celebration of our
Movements 23 | 24 _ 103
instinctively, honestly. And you can feel the moment
when, if we are working on some common material,
something starts happening, or when something is needless or stupid. Any material that works with all that we
have got survives.
¬ After a light, attentive little dance along the highlighted vertical line, our tall Alice drops to her knees
when they slowly separate and drift apart during
their spiral crawl. The female dancer gets up and
continues her unusual gliding spiral, accompanied
by unexpected head-jerks and impulsive hand movements, until the male dancer suddenly stops her.
Vučinić: Yes, “stop, you fool!”
¬ She halts, gently supported, like a doll hanging
from an embrace.
Mišić: That is an image from a comic book I’ve been
carrying around for a year. It is very impressive to me, the
way he holds her and the relationship that stems from
that. I wanted to use it before, but it didn’t fit into the last
show, and here that image found its place, it came alive.
< You, Photo: Tin Jutriša >
friendship… but for us, it was a form of cleansing. So,
in spite of the stains and the slipperiness, it propelled
us into something new!
Mišić: There is a game between us that is completely
serious, but what comes out of that game can go anywhere,
it is not something learnt by heart, pre-constructed. And
the slow motion is wonderful, it can tell so much, if you
can perform it properly. Set to the tune of classical music, it
reminds me of Lars von Trier! I was interested in whether
these inner things could come out on the stage as well,
to get another kind of beauty, another kind of attention,
another kind of focus, something different from a purely
physical dance and this combination of variations.
And the costume is something our producer brought
us once. We were looking at the skirt when Ogi said:
come on, climb up. I sat on his shoulders and he started
playing. From this interplay of ours, from the way we
do things, try things out – what if we did this next – we
grow into the finesse parts. There is no big philosophy
at work here.
Vučinić: That is the way I generally like to work,
throw myself into something, and then start searching,
104 _ Kretanja 23 | 24
performance You • interview: Aleksandra Mišić i Ognjen Vučinić ¬ And t hen t he woman/doll gets shaken and a
reversal of sorts happens. She takes over his body,
which, through her embrace, takes on the form of
the pieta, and softly lays him on the ground. She
calms down, and he starts twitching, pulsing, his
body in torment.
Vučinić: That is my own story about growing up, it
is an exorcism, leave me be!
Mišić: His movement is based on emotions, initiating from the heart chakra, moving through a body that
struggles and doesn’t know how to release it all out. With
his physique, it looks so powerful, and yet, there is so
little of it, no hysteria, just pure emotions that do not
know whether they want to go out or in, seeking a way
out through the spine, through the pelvis, feet or head.
That is the prime mover in that little solo.
¬ By laying her palm lightly on his chest, she calms
him down, and then lays her head on him, lies by his
side in an embrace, and so they stay still, barely visible, barely perceptible in the darkness, accompanied
by a projection of the video and the verses of Enes
Kišević: “I will write you a poem / And in it will be
/ the Sun, the wind and you.” The poem concludes:
“Until you touch / yourself / Outside the boundaries
of the body.”
And in the end, they have a drowsy awakening,
feeling out each other’s faces as if they were blind;
then their hand, their skin, as if in a trance, as if they
found each other after a long, long time and now they
will finally dance forever…
Vučinić: Yes, it is a striking experience and it is
pretty hard to stay professional in the final two minutes,
at a time when we feel closest to each other, when we
are completely bare and we can sense where and what
we are.
Mišić: In the end, we always go through a catharsis,
tears, especially if we haven’t been in contact for a long
time; it must be because of all the tension: everything
we carry inside just bursts to the surface.
Vučinić: The performance always has roughly the
same charge; I usually don’t allow myself to let something like that out on the stage, but here, no-one can
see it anyway. When the ending theme rolls out and,
walking off, I once again see the image of our relationship, all these images rush to my mind and my head
starts spinning…
Mišić: I have those images as well! That time when
we tried to do somersaults in a small gym with no mat;
we tried to take a running start and jump far and high,
ending in a somersault – and we landed on our heads! Or
that time when we were filming in November at minus
five degrees, and I had a fever and a body temperature
of 41 degrees! Or you and me, on a bench in 1986. And
how about the time when you spent the whole night
sleeping under the mattress, and we spent the whole
night looking for you?
Vučinić: Somehow, when life and dance overlap at
the same, you simply – snap.
Maja Đurinović (born Zalar in Zagreb in 1960) graduated from the Classical Gymnasium and the School for Rhythm
and Dance, and attained a degree in South Slavic languages
and literature at the Faculty of Humanities and Social Sciences
in Zagreb. She is a dance professional: first as a performer for
some fifteen years at Milana Broš’s Chamber Ensemble of Free
Dance and the Gesta company, and later as a teacher, choreographer and scene movement assistant. She has published
texts on topics of pedagogy, criticism, history and general
dance theory. She is the author of books on Croatian dance
history Mercedes Goritz Pavelić, Mia Čorak Slavenska, The
Development of Contemporary Dance: Ana Maletić, a biography (Razvoj suvremenog plesa: Ana Maletić, životopis),
and the interactive multimedia presentation Milana Broš’s
Kaspomania (Kaspomanija Milane Broš). The main topic of
her research is dance in Croatia between the two wars, and
she has given lessons and presentations on the topic; she prepared the dance segments for the Avant-garde Tendencies in
Croatian Art (Avangardne tendencije u hrvatskoj umjetnosti)
and Passion and Revolt – Expressionism in Croatia (Strast i
bunt – ekspresionizam u Hrvatskoj) exhibits, she presented
the topic of Croatian Quills in Apology of Dance Theatre (Hrvatska pera u apologiji plesnog teatra) at the Miroslav Krleža
Festival, and published Vera Milčinović – Tashamira Dances
of Reality and Unreality in Feminine Future. Performance,
Dance, War, Politics and Eroticism by Adrien Sina. She is on
the editorial board of the Movements dance magazine, and
the editor of the Plesnascena.hr web portal. She is Associate
Professor at the Academy of Arts in Osijek.
Movements 23 | 24 _ 105
predstava: Dokle god smo zajedno
predstava: Dokle god smo zajedno < Dokle god smo zajedno, Foto: Nina Đurđević >
IVANA SLUNJSKI
U potrazi za
drugim:
solo koji to
odbija biti
O izvedbi Dokle god smo zajedno Silvije Marchig
U
svome izvedbenom radu Silvia Marchig ustrajno
njeguje različite oblike suradničkih odnosa, autorskih
zagovora i pregovora, prakticiranja tolerancije i izazova drukčijega, sučeljavanja, ali i učenja, smatrajući izvedbu
dijeljenjem s drugima, sa scenskim i gledališnim subivateljima,
sudionicima procesa scenske razmjene. Autoričino isticanje
važnosti događanja u prostoru između donekle razjašnjava
njezino ustezanje od monoforme – tijekom njezina sad već
poduljeg izvođačkog staža solo joj je neprestance izmicao, ili
je ona vješto izmicala njemu: „Moja posljednja sola uključuju
izravan odnos s publikom, nisu sola u kojima sam posve sama.
Ne znam, valjda ne znam raditi sama. Nikad nisam napravila
nešto u čemu sam stvarno sama.”1 I doista, ta dva istoimena
sola Dokle god smo zajedno ili, točnije, rad s polazištem u
tematici osobne arheologije, razvijan u različitim fazama i
kontekstima, iz kojega se osamostaljuju dva funkcionalno
neovisna sola s pojedinim zajedničkim motivima, mogu se
shvatiti i samo nominalno kao sola: u projektu 15 godina
1
Moj razgovor sa Silvijom Marchig Nije vrijeme za bavljenje
trivijalnostima u ovom broju Kretanja na str. 119.
Trafika 2 to je petnaestominutno razastiranje izolirana scenskog mikrosvijeta na jednoj od šest postaja koreografirana
prohoda izvedbenim prostorom kao muzejskim postavom i
jedan od četiriju izvedbenih odgovora na pitanje o bolnome
mjestu afirmiranih na „maloj izvedbenoj konferenciji” u sklopu projekta Četverorukost 3 . Na tome je metakazališnome i/
2
Projekt je premijerno izveden 23. srpnja 2013. u prostorima
nekadašnje Tvornice motorne opreme i ljevaonice Rikard Benčić. Autori i izvođači: Marin Alvir, Lara Badurina, Dijana Bolanča, Edvin
Liverić, Magdalena Lupi Alvir, Silvia Marchig, Josip Maršić, Andrej
Mirčev, Nikola Orešković, Iva Nerina Sibila, Gordana Svetopetrić i
Žak Valenta.
3
Četverorukost je cjelogodišnji projekt Četveroruke, umjetničke
organizacije koju vode redateljica Marina Petković Liker i plesna
umjetnica Sonja Pregrad, a istražuje ženske izvedbene prakse.
Mala izvedbena konferencija na temu bolnoga mjesta u intimnome,
društvenom i političkom kontekstu odvijala se 9. studenoga 2014. u
podrumu zgrade u Ožegovićevoj 7 u Zagrebu. Izvedbene odgovore
ponudile su četiri umjetnice: redateljica i dramska umjetnica Helena
Petković Sjecišta, vizualna umjetnica Sabina Mikelić Mulu skupinu
korijenja svezanih zajedno, glazbenica Kaja Farszky Buku tišine ili tišinu buke? te plesna umjetnica Silvia Marchig Dokle god smo zajedno.
Uz njih je sudjelovalo dvadesetak gledatelja/sugovornika (drugih
umjetnika, kritičara, teoretičara, studenata te ostalih zainteresiranih posjetitelja). Konferencija je reprizirana 7. veljače 2015. na
Akademiji dramske umjetnosti u Zagrebu.
Movements 23 | 24 _ 107
predstava: Dokle god smo zajedno
ili metateorijskom događanju gledatelj dvostruko uveden kao
akter, jednom kao suizvođač čiju reakciju (ne samo gestu ili
mimiku nego i verbalizirani odaziv) izvođačica hvata zrcalom
(motiv koji se ponavlja u obama solima), drugi put kao sudionik rasprave o izvedbenim odgovorima. No upravo to što
uporno otklanjamo od sebe signifikantno progovara o nama
i više od onoga na čemu ustrajavamo. Tako sročen, citirani
iskaz Silvije Marchig asocijativno priziva iz daljina mnogo
puta dosad tumačenu eksplikaciju jedne od začetnica sola
modernoga plesa Isadore Duncan: „Kad sam plesala, uvijek
sam nastojala biti Kor: bila sam Kor mladih djevojaka koji
pozdravlja povratak flote, Kor koji pleše pirih ili bakantski
ples. Nikad nisam plesala solo.”4 Kako shvatiti izvedbenu
strategiju osloboditeljice plesa, koja odbacuje krutost baletne
stege i podčinjavanje tuđim vizijama plesnosti, plešući vlastitu
umjetnost i vlastito tijelo i tražeći autentičan pokret kojim bi
eksternalizirala individualan doživljaj svijeta? Korom se Isadora Duncan nije pozivala samo na kolektivno tijelo, tvrdi Ann
Daly autorica ekstenzivne studije o njezinu radu, nego i na
„interakciju ili duet, nazovimo to tako, svoga tijela i prostora koji ju okružuje”5 . S obzirom na emancipacijski potencijal
ženskoga sola, pokušaj istodobna utjelovljenja pojedinačnoga
tijela i kolektivnoga tijela opire se tradiranim binarnim podjelama, stoga Duncan ne teži samo izražavanju unutarnjih
impulsa, posrijedi je „složenija semiotika reprezentacije”6 . A
grčki kor ili „majku svih drama” usto sama locira kao „ishodište umjetnosti koja se bori za svoj legitimitet”7.
Od sola modernoga plesa kao prototipa ženske izvedbene
forme koja se u plesnoj umjetnosti tijekom 20. stoljeća razvijala kao čin oblikovanja autopoetičkoga diskursa i konstituiranja
izvedbenoga subjekta taj najčišći iskaz do danas nosi teret
autorskoga legitimiranja. Usporedno s usponom egzemplarne
forme izgradnje scenskoga identiteta s druge se strane događa
diseminacija subjekta i to, prema pojedinim tumačenjima 8 , od
samih njezinih začetaka jer počiva na individualizmu u sprezi
s kapitalističkim proizvodnim odnosima, a danas je upravo
solo kao relativno jeftin proizvod najpogodniji oblik trženja
umjetnosti i manipuliranja umjetničkim zahtjevima u ime
autentičnosti. S obzirom na nužno reproduciranje postojećih
proizvodnih odnosa u održavanju takva sustava, konstruira4
Iz eseja „Ples Grka” u knjizi Isadora Duncan: The Art of Dance,
ur. Sheldon Cheney. Cit. prema Isadora Duncan, „Excerpts from Her
Writings”, The Vision of Modern Dance: In the Words of Its Creators,
ur. Jean M. Brown, Naomi Mindlin i Charles Humphrey Woodford,
Princeton Book Company, Hightstown, 1998, str. 9.
5
Done into Dance: Isadora Duncan in America, Wesleyan University Press, Middletown, 2002, str. 6.
6
Daly, str. 20.
7
Daly, str. 148.
8
Usp. Bojana Cvejić i Ana Vujanović, Public Sphere by Performance, b_books, Les laboratoires d’ Aubervilliers i ThH, Berlin – Paris
– Beograd, 2012, str. 145–146.
108 _ Kretanja 23 | 24
nje izvedbenoga subjekta podliježe i ideološki premreženim
obrazovnim programima, a metode i postupci oblikovanja
ne zadržavaju se isključivo unutar autoreferencijalnoga polja
izvedbenih umjetnosti.
Izvedbena konferencija Četverorukost kao pandan izvedbenom predavanju (lecture-performance), u posljednjem
desetljeću nezaobilaznom u izvedbenoj praksi, i bitno različiti
konteksti izvođenja, privatni podrum i akademija, premošćuju
različite načine stjecanja i prijenosa dviju vrsta znanja, znanja
o praksi i znanja iz prakse. U ovome slučaju ipak nije riječ
o pravoj hibridnoj formi, okvirno je zadržan konferencijalni
način izlaganja, ali izvedbeni odgovori zadržavaju integritet
scenske tvorbe koja u građi ne usvaja predavačke principe,
odnosno u pojedinim odgovorima tek u naznakama (primjerice u izvedbi Helene Petković, kojom se tekst dalje neće
baviti). Tema bolnoga mjesta s obzirom na izvedbeni format
pretpostavlja stvaranje ili izlaganje u odnosu na proživljeno
iskustvo pa u manjoj ili većoj mjeri izvedbeni odgovori sadrže
elemente stvarnosnoga kazališta (theatre of the real). Bolno mjesto, ali i mjesto koje je označeno kao liminalno jer se
zbog rascjepa u trenutku traume ne može do kraja obuhvatiti
iskustvom pa analogno tomu ni jezično artikulirati, unatoč
nemogućnosti iskazivanja traži da ga prevedemo u smisao,
da bismo ga razumjeli, postavljajući zahtjev koji zapravo
odgovara psihoanalitičkom pojmu prisile na ponavljanje.
Element ponavljanja i potreba da se to autentično mjesto,
iskustveno nedohvatno ili ne do kraja dohvatno, prevede u
smisao u izvedbenome smislu upućuju na reprezentacijski
model, no unošenjem stvarnoga u performativnu situaciju
stvarnosno se kazalište od mimetizma odmiče. Bol, bolno
mjesto, trauma, scenski uokvireni, uzdaju se u empatiju kao
temeljni uvjet socijalizacije, dijeljenje situacije afirmira se
kao iscjeljujuće, a gledatelji angažiraju kao svjedoci procesa
reintegracije, koji će stvarno iskustvo dijeljenja transponirati
izvan kazališta i možebitno pokrenuti društvene promjene 9 .
Na tome se tragu može razumjeti i uloga gledatelja/sudionika Četverorukosti.
Polazeći iz plesa, ali gradeći gotovo dramsku situaciju,
izvedba Silvije Marchig Dokle god smo zajedno u konstituiranju scenskoga subjekta zamućuje perspektive prvoga i trećeg
lica iz kojih se građa donosi, oblikujući neku vrstu nestalnoga
entiteta. Kako navodi u knjižici, u radu se usredotočila na
„osobnu arheologiju napuštenih prostora i izgubljenih odnosa”, bilo da su posrijedi bliske osobe ili odnos prema životu
ili djelu javnih osoba koji su joj u nekome aspektu poticajni
ili bliski. U prvome dijelu rada kroz vrata vidimo izvođačicu
kako u prostoru gdje je neposredno prije izveden prethodni
izvedbeni odgovor iz materijalnih tragova naslućuje kretanje
9
To je osjetnije kod oblika dokumentarnoga kazališta i doslovnoga kazališta (verbatim) koji se primjenjuju u terapiji.
predstava: Dokle god smo zajedno ili obrise drugih tijela, uspostavljajući relacije prema objektima i prema pretpostavljenome mjestu obilježenom nečijim
bivanjem u prostoru. Potom u istome prostoru s gledateljima
sjeda publici okrenuta leđima i izgovara rečenicu koju možemo pripisati njoj, ali i nekomu drugom. Zadržavajući smislenu
koherentnost jednoga iskaza, a prebacujući se iz govorenja
u prvome licu u pripovjedni modus trećega lica, a potom i
puštajući snimku razgovora Petera Orra sa Sylvijom Plath,
Silvia Marchig daje glas pjesnikinji da kroz nju progovori.
Onda uzima zrcalo i odrazom tražeći sugovornika pita imamo
li pravo izravno govoriti o osobnim traumama, bolestima,
smrtima? Dok utjelovljuje izvanjski glas, vlastitu cjelovitost
(na razini izvedbenosti, dakako) rascjepljuje na glas koji se
rasprostire u jednome smjeru i nijemi odraz koji tek traži potvrdu u gledatelju/svjedoku. Stoga se izvedbeni entitet ovdje
doista participativno ostvaruje u višeglasju. Jer u situaciji
kazališne realnosti, ali zato stvarne scenske razmjene, kako
odrediti je li istinit glas ili odraz u zrcalu, čije živote pamtiti,
treba li govoriti o običnoj smrti običnog čovjeka ili bizarnoj
smrti velike pjesnikinje, čija je bol veća, autoričina zbog očeve
smrti ili bol od života Sylvije Plath? Dobivši potvrdan odgovor od gledatelja, izvođačica ustaje, istražuje prostor oko
sebe (lizne zid, leđima opipava hladnoću, liježe na pod), pa
sebe (prebire prstima po tijelu, zrakom ispunja usnu šupljinu),
pleše. Iz višeglasja se disocira singularni izvedbeni entitet.
Osciliranje između dvojnosti i fluidni identitet, osluškivanje
nutrine i upućenost na druge, određivanje mimo kategorija,
prepoznavanje inskripcija i autentičnost koja neuhvatljivo
izmiče stalnosti su s kojima solo pregovara od rudimentarnih
oblika do danas. Razmatrajući te ustaljenosti forme može
se zaključiti da Silvia Marchig, kao i njezina daleka sestra po
plesu, ipak pleše (i) solo.
Movements 23 | 24 _ 109
razgovor: Silvija Marchig
razgovor: Silvija Marchig < Dokle god smo zajedno, Foto: Nina Đurđević >
IVANA SLUNJSKI
Nije vrijeme
za bavljenje
trivijalnostima
Razgovor sa
Silvijom Marchig
K
oje ti je prvo sjećanje na ples?
Sjećam se sebe kako plešem. Plešem s velikim
oduševljenjem, glazba i pokret silno me vesele, a veseli me i činjenica da me gledaju. Oduvijek me je fascinirala
performativnost te situacije, kako to danas mogu imenovati,
jer nije bila posrijedi samo dječja potreba da budem u središtu
pozornosti. Plesala sam i sama za sebe, ali uzbuđenje je raslo
neizmjerno u trenutku kada bi me netko gledao i kada bi se
ples stvarao za publiku. Za onu pravu, na sceni Pionirskog
kazališta, ili barem samo za mamu i susjedu.
¬ Što te je potaknulo da počneš plesati? Gdje si stjecala
prva plesna iskustva?
Još u predškolskoj dobi, mislim s pet godina, mama me
upisala u Pionirsko kazalište na Sušaku (današnji Hrvatski
kulturni dom). Tamo sam provela cijelo djetinjstvo. Pionirsko
kazalište funkcioniralo je tako da su djeca za djecu pod vodstvom stručnih pedagoga stvarala predstave. Joža Komljenović, bivši solist i ravnatelj Baleta u Hrvatskom narodnom
kazalištu Ivana pl. Zajca u Rijeci, ili barba Joža, kako smo ga
zvali, vodio je baletnu grupu. Mi smo s našim dragim barbom Jožom kreirali niz dječjih baleta, Cvrčak i mravi, Mačak
u čizmama, Ivica i Marica, Ščelkunčik... Bile su to iznimno
profesionalne produkcije, od našega pristupa probama i koreografiji do kostimografije, scenografije, rasvjete. Moj se prvi
susret s plesom i dogodio tako da sam odmah bila na sceni.
Nikad nisam bila hobist, od samoga početka meni je to bilo
jako ozbiljno. Barba Joža uvelike je zaslužan za to, njegova
velika ljubav za balet i za scenu kojom nas je zarazio.
¬ Je li balet bio tvoj prvi izbor ili možda tada u Rijeci i nije
bilo drugog umjetničkog plesa dostupna djeci i mladima?
Balet je bio i uvijek će biti moja velika ljubav. Smatram
ga plemenitom disciplinom. Volim stanje uma koje zahtijeva od plesača, nalazim ga bliskim koncentraciji istočnjačkih
borilačkih vještina. Naravno, ako se uči i prakticira na dobar način. Postoji i njegova tamna, nasilna inačica, koja je,
nažalost, rasprostranjenija. Dobar baletni pedagog mora
imati umna i tjelesna znanja pravoga majstora. Vjerojatno
bih i postala klasična balerina da sam bila dovoljno dobra u
fizičkome smislu. I da nisam neprestano sve dovodila u pitanje, što čistu formu stavlja u neodrživu poziciju. U Rijeci do
devedesetih godina prošlog stoljeća nije bilo suvremenoga
plesa, barem ja ne znam za to. Postojao je balet u HNK-u, to
je sve. Kada je ranih 1990-ih Senka Baruška osnovala grupu
Labis, to je bio prvi profesionalni pokušaj plesanja bilo čega
mimo baleta. Ponavljam, barem koliko znam. Bit će da se
avangardnih dvadesetih godina 20. stoljeća u Rijeci događalo svašta zanimljivo, ali ništa što bi protegnulo utjecaj na
sljedeća desetljeća.
Movements 23 | 24 _ 111
¬ Kako je izgledalo školovanje u baletnome studiju HNK-a
Ivana pl. Zajca? Koje bi pedagoge izdvojila i zašto?
Sve donedavno u Rijeci nije postojala baletna škola.
Joža Komljenović svojim je ogromnim entuzijazmom i energijom sam vodio hrpu djece i s nama radio predstave u
sklopu već spomenuta Pionirskog kazališta. Postavljalo se
pitanje edukacije u klasičnome smislu, kako bi se omogućio
priljev kadra za baletni ansambl u HNK-u. On je to nekako
samorazumljivo preuzeo na sebe i iz naše grupe formirao
se prvi razred baletnoga studija. Krenuli smo raditi strukturiranije i uz dotadašnji rad na koreografijama svakodnevno
smo imali i pravi class. Poslije su se barbi Joži kao pedagozi
pridružile i primabalerina Katarina Kocka, koja je došla
u Rijeku iz tada već ratnog Sarajeva i radila kao baletna
majstorica s ansamblom, nakon nje Oxana Brandiboura i
još neke balerine iz ansambla, tada više nisam bila u Rijeci
i ne znam točno tko sve. Uglavnom, bili smo usko vezani
uz rad ansambla HNK-a. U kasnijim godinama nas nekoliko
smjelo je dolaziti i na jutarnje satove profesionalaca, što
je meni bilo jednostavno fenomenalno. Ubrzo smo bili i
primljeni u ansambl, da popunimo zadnje redove – bio je
rat i riječki balet bio je pred raspadom, jer je pretežno bio
sastavljen od plesača iz Srbije, Rusije, Rumunjske. Ostali su
samo najluđi i najhrabriji. Ili se jednostavno nisu imali kamo
vratiti, kod kuće ih nije čekalo ništa bolje. Paradoksalno,
kaos i grozote rata i tranzicije 1990-ih nama su otvorile
mogućnost da stupimo na veliku scenu, u prave balete.
Sjećam se da sam tada svojoj srednjoškolskoj prijateljici
objašnjavala kako je iznimno važno, a ujedno i bizarno, da
se u danima najužasnijega horora, straha i agresije, održi
nešto toliko efemerno i čisto kao što je klasični balet. Bila
sam svjesna raskoraka stvarnosti u kojoj živim, na primjer
toga da se svađam s mamom da me za vrijeme zračne uzbune u potpunu zamračenju pusti u kazalište na probu,
gdje smo onda na pozornici u stanci uzbune isprobavali
scenu kraljevskog vrta iz Žar-ptice i loptali se zlatnim jabukama. Meni je to bilo genijalno. Trijumf umjetnosti nad
banalnošću zla.
¬ Možeš li usporediti baletni studio HNK-a Ivana pl. Zajca
s drugim tadašnjim studijima ili školama u Hrvatskoj, ili
možebitno u tadašnjoj Jugoslaviji, s obzirom na način rada
i metodiku? Imaš li kakvu predodžbu o tome?
Kao srednjoškolka susretala sam se s učenicama zagrebačke i beogradske škole na seminarima koje sam pohađala,
u Budimpešti i Primoštenu primjerice. Razlike su bile ogromne, zbog specifikuma okolnosti koje sam opisala i u kojima
je djelovao naš baletni studio. One su bile tehnički mnogo
bolje, čišće, ali, s druge strane, bile su učenice. Ja sam sebe
doživljavala kao profesionalku. S obzirom na scensko iskustvo
koje sam imala zapravo sam to već i bila.
112 _ Kretanja 23 | 24
¬ Što si gledala u kazalištu, a da je ostavilo traga na tebi?
Što si čitala? Jesi li se okušavala u drugim umjetnostima?
Pretpostavljam da svako razdoblje stvara svoje specifične
procjepe za mlade hipersenzibilce i kreativce. Kretala sam se
u krugu vršnjaka kojima je jednako kao i meni umjetnost bila
jedina djelatnost koju se zaista može uzeti ozbiljno i koja ima
smisla – uz svakodnevnu dekadenciju. Naravno, išli smo na
koncerte, čitali smo egzistencijaliste, išli smo redovito u kazalište. Tada je Tomaž Pandur bio jako popularan u Rijeci, na
primjer. Livio Badurina u Pandurovoj Carmen, eto, on mi pada
na pamet kao netko tko me se jako dojmio kad sam imala
petnaest-šesnaest. Ali ne, nisam imala potrebu sama glumiti
ili pisati. Ples mi je bio i više nego dovoljan, sveobuhvatan.
Tada su se u Rijeku iz Engleske vratili Žak Valenta i Senka Baruška. Ona je imala hrpu videa suvremenoga plesa, to
smo gutali. DV8, Pina Bausch, Joëlle Bouvier i Régis Obadia
– kada sam ih prvi put vidjela na videu, zgromilo me koliko
ljudsko tijelo u pokretu može biti moćno i sugestivno. Senka
Baruška je oko 1990. osnovala grupu Labis i to je bio moj prvi
dodir sa suvremenim plesom. Zajedno smo trenirali i radili na
koreografijama. Labis je bio iznimno progresivan, nije se naslanjao na prijašnje prakse, nego je tražio nešto posve novo.
Postavili smo tada neke vrlo zanimljive predstave i mnogo
kraćih koreografija. S predstavom Buđenje 1991. sudjelovali
smo na Tjednu suvremenog plesa, na Baletnom natjecanju
u Novom Sadu, u kategoriji koreografije, pred sam rat, a
imali smo i pravu malu turneju kombijem po Nizozemskoj,
ušli smo u selekciju prestižna festivala u Groningenu 1992.
kao prva grupa iz Jugoslavije. Onda je Senka Baruška otišla
u Amsterdam na SNDO1 , a u međuvremenu je i većinu nas
mlađih uvjerila kako moramo nastaviti svoje obrazovanje u
inozemstvu. Kroz Labis je prošlo mnogo današnjih izvedbenih
umjetnika Hrvatske, u nevjerojatnu izvođačkom rasponu, od
baletana svjetske karijere Ronalda Savkovića do prominentnih
hrvatskih glumaca kao što su Dražen Šivak, Edvin Liverić i
Nina Violić. Labis je bio svojevrstan fenomen, stilski toliko
raznolik, uzori su mu bili u rasponu od plesnoga teatra do
Mercea Cunninghama. I sve to potpuno izvan institucija,
isključivo kao rezultat osobne inicijative i entuzijazma svih
nas, a posebno Senke Baruške i Žaka Valente.
Drugi veliki svijet
ašto si nakon baletnoga studija u riječkome HNK-u
izabrala drezdensku Palucca Schule? Je li te tko savjetovao, usmjerio? Koliko si tada imala jasnu viziju
sebe kao plesačice?
Govorimo o ranim devedesetima 20. stoljeća, dakle o
vremenu prije interneta. Tada dostupne informacije prenosile
Z
1
Škola za razvoj novoga plesa (School voor Nieuwe
Dansontwikkeling).
razgovor: Silvija Marchig su se usmenom predajom, eventualno u obliku nekog letka
škole ili članka iz stranih časopisa, koji je netko negdje u inozemstvu iskopao. Ili se trebalo fizički otputovati na određeno
mjesto, a nije bilo jeftinih letova. Znala sam da želim postati
izvrsnom plesačicom, nisam imala neku točniju predodžbu što
to treba značiti. Senka Baruška savjetovala mi je da odem na
amsterdamsku akademiju, na odsjek suvremenog plesa. Meni
je ta škola financijski bila nedostižna. Jedna njemačka kolegica
predložila mi je da odem u Njemačku, gdje su državne škole
besplatne. Opisala mi je Palucca Schule kao školu koja ustraje
na klasičnome radu na tehnici, ali i na improvizaciji. To mi se
činilo kao dobar spoj. Imala sam njihovu adresu, pisala sam
im, obavijestili su me o datumu audicije. Kupila sam kartu
za vlak i otišla. Iz današnje perspektive hiperinformiranosti
zvuči skroz ludo. Kao da ti netko veže oči i pusti te u svijet.
¬ Nisi pomišljala na baletnu karijeru? Što misliš kada kažeš
da nisi bila „dovoljno dobra u fizičkome smislu”?
Za vrijeme školovanja nisam bila usredotočena samo na
tehniku, u baletnome studiju djelomično smo bili na sceni, a
djelomično u dvorani, što zahtijeva drukčiju vrstu pripreme
i koncentracije. U djetinjstvu nisam imala dril potreban da
bih u tim godinama imala čistu formu i čistu tehniku. Da sam
ostala u Rijeci, vjerojatno bih ostala u baletnome ansamblu.
Zapravo je Senka Baruška najviše utjecala na mene da se
trebam maknuti iz Rijeke i naučiti nove stvari. U to vrijeme
činilo mi se da je sve što je izvan Rijeke, sve što je izvan Jugoslavije, genijalno, jer je to bio veliki svijet. Tadašnji ravnatelj
riječkoga baleta Peter Pustišek rekao mi je: „Pa koliko će ti
trajati ta škola, imat ćeš dvadeset i jednu kada završiš, bit
ćeš stara.” Htio je da ostanem u ansamblu. U baletnome si
svijetu s osamnaest, i prije, spreman za scenu. Oduvijek sam
imala neku krizu identiteta kao balerina, do dan-danas imam
sindrom varalice kada sam okružena kolegicama baletnim
pedagoginjama, iako sam u neku ruku bila pravija balerina
od njih, jer sam ipak plesala u klasičnim baletima, a većina
njih nije. Plesala sam jednu od vilisa u drugome činu baleta
Giselle u toj dobi, recimo.
Poštujem baletnu tehniku i pokušavam ju dubinski razumjeti. Prošla sam put od silna truda da svladam i usavršim
tu formu do njezine potpune negacije; čim sam završila akademiju, odmah sam se ošišala na kratko i nisam htjela ni čuti
za klasični balet, osim što sam morala voditi satove jer je to
bilo najisplativije. Kada sam se nakon petnaest godina spremala za stručni ispit iz baleta, da bih mogla predavati u školi,
ponovno sam ju upoznala. Ima u baletu potrebe da se tijelo
uvrne, disciplinira, što jest invazivno, ali zapravo je posrijedi
sofisticiranje nečega što je prirodno, a ne denaturaliziranje.
Danas se u mome izvedbenom radu tu i tamo pojavi neki
citat ili element iz moje baletne prošlosti, vjerojatno i češće
negoli sam toga svjesna. Balet se ipak upisao u moje tijelo.
¬ Prilagodba na novu sredinu, drugi jezik, drukčiji mentalitet, drukčiji režim, kako je to izgledalo, jesi li imala kakvih
dvojba, što te je vodilo naprijed?
Bilo mi je, zapravo, jako teško. Dresden je kao grad bivše
Njemačke Demokratske Republike tih godina prolazio tranziciju. Ljudi su, generalno govoreći, bili strašno nepovjerljivi
prema strancima. Gotovo nitko nije govorio engleski, čak ni
u školi. I sama škola prolazila je svojevrsnu krizu identiteta,
s jedne strane rigidno se držala tradicije njemačkoga Ausdruckstanza i nasljeđa Gret Palucce, s druge strane bilo je
profesora koji su bili svjesni da se moraju uvesti promjene u
program. Jezgra starih pedagoga htjela je školu zadržati u
tradicijskim okvirima, nitko od njih nije ni bio nigdje izvan
Istočnoga bloka. Imali su dodira s Rusijom, znali su što je
klasični balet i znali su što je Ausdrucktanz, bili su jako, jako
zatvoreni. Studenti su uglavnom bili domaći, mladi koji su
završili šest razreda Palucce, pripremnih razreda za visoku
školu. Što ja tamo radim, nikomu baš nije bilo jasno. Samo
su znali da sam iz zemlje u kojoj je trenutačno rat i koja je
bila socijalistička kao i njihova. Ali ne, nisam imala dvojba.
Jednostavno nisam mogla natrag, morala sam dokazati svima,
roditeljima koji su se brinuli, ravnatelju riječkoga Baleta koji
me odgovarao od nauma da odem na daljnje školovanje, da
sam na pravom mjestu. I da će sve biti odlično.
¬
Kakav je bio program te škole?
Klasični balet svaki dan, kao temeljna tehnika, uz to tehnike modernoga plesa: Limon, Graham, satovi improvizacije
po uzoru na rad Gret Palucce. U višim semestrima učila se
i kompozicija, odnosno koreografija. Plus osnovni teorijski
predmeti, sve na njemačkom, koji u početku nisam znala.
Svako ljeto organizirali su seminare: toga ljeta 1994. došao
je nizozemski koreograf i pedagog Benno Voorham i vodio
radionicu kontaktne improvizacije. Tih četrnaest dana došlo
mi je kao kap vode nakon duga, duga hoda pustinjom. Pritom nisam htjela priznati ni sebi ni drugima da sam sve to
vrijeme u pustinji. I danas smatram Ausdrucktanz moćnim i
zanimljivim, volim njemačku avangardu, Valesku Gert, Mary
Wigman, Gret Paluccu. No za vrijeme boravka u Dresdenu
imala sam dojam da se ničemu ne pristupa izravno i konkretno, nego da se sve nalazi negdje oko mene, a očekuje se da
to razumijem i svladam. Te prijelomne godine škola je tražila
novi identitet, kvaliteta nastave užasno je patila, dijelom je
i to razlog zašto sam otišla.
¬ Zašto baš na akademiju u Mannheimu? Po čemu su
slične, po čemu različite te dvije akademije?
Nakon prve godine odlučila sam promijeniti sredinu. Jednostavno sam shvatila da ću usahnuti ako ostanem dalje u
atmosferi u kojoj cijeli grad i dalje vonja na najgore iz prošlosti, gdje ne možeš govoriti engleski u tramvaju, a da te čudno
Movements 23 | 24 _ 113
ne gledaju, gdje je sve prekriveno slojem crnog ugljena na
minus 25° C u zimskim mjesecima i, pogotovo, gdje je škola
u tolikoj krizi da ne zna kamo dalje. Poslije sam na audicijama
susretala bivše kolege iz Palucce i saznala da su se okolnosti
brzo promijenile nabolje, što u gradu, što u samoj školi. No
otišla sam prije tih promjena. U Mannheim sam opet došla
slučajno: prijateljica iz Dresdena također je išla na audiciju
autom, a ja sam bila posve bez novca i mnogo mi je značilo
da mogu jeftino doći do tamo. Pa sam otišla s njom i prošla
audiciju. Škola mi se, za razliku od drezdenske, činila dinamičnom, živahnom, efikasnom. Dopali su mi se i profesori i
studenti, i ja njima. Plesna akademija u Mannheimu u sklopu
Državne visoke škole za glazbu i izvedbenu umjetnost Heidelberg-Mannheim (Staatliche Hochschule für Musik und
Darstellende Kunst Heidelberg-Mannheim) ima glazbeni i
plesni odsjek, a program plesnoga odsjeka koncipiran je za
obrazovanje tipična plesača u gradskom kazalištu: klasični
balet, suvremene tehnike, mnogo repertoara, klasičnoga i karakternoga, malo teorije. I mogućnost usporedna pohađanja
pedagoškoga smjera – to je također bilo važno za moj izbor,
jer me težak život u međuvremenu uvjerio da je možda dobro
imati i zanimanje koje se u svakom trenutku može unovčiti.
Razlozi za odluku bili su krajnje trivijalni. Što, naravno, nosi
sa sobom svoje posljedice. Akademiju u Mannheimu naposljetku pamtim po malo toga dobroga.
Lice i naličje svakodnevice – bešćutnost sustava i mekoća
potpore
renuci, situacije, osobe koji su ti bili važni tijekom
obrazovanja, odnosno izrastanja u plesačicu, poslije
i autoricu, koji su bitno utjecali na tebe ili su ti bili
prekretnicom u promišljanju plesa, stvaranja, izvedbenosti,
umjetnosti općenito?
Nakon spomenutih Jože Komljenovića i Senke Baruške
koji su u mojim najmlađim danima izrazito utjecali na mene,
tijekom školovanja na objema akademijama teško sam se nalazila s profesorima i bila sam prilično neprilagodljiva, vječno
u nekom napadu protiv sustava. U Mannheimu sam imala
priliku raditi s Josephom Willemsom, bivšim plesačem Williama Forsythea i Nizozemskoga plesnog kazališta (NDT), koji
mi je pomogao ponovno pronaći plesačko samopouzdanje
u dvorani. Onda, na mojoj posljednjoj godini studija na akademiji gostovao je koreograf Richard Wherlock. Postavljao
je svoju koreografiju Transit Dances, s nama studentima. Na
audiciji sam dobila solo ulogu, na iznenađenje mnogih mojih
profesora, koji su ga čak i upozorili na moju tvrdoglavost i
eventualnu nemogućnost sudjelovanja na pojedinim probama, s obzirom na to da sam sve vrijeme uz studij i radila da
bih zaradila za život. Njegovo povjerenje nevjerojatno mi je
mnogo značilo i divno smo surađivali. Na kraju mi je ta uloga spasila i diplomu i popravila status odmetnice. Tijekom
T
114 _ Kretanja 23 | 24
studija pohađala sam i mnoge ljetne radionice, među kojima
bih izdvojila suradnju s Felixom Ruckertom na projektu Ring
za vrijeme minhenskog festivala Tanzwerkstatt Europa. To
iskustvo potaknulo me je dalje na promišljanja o izvedbenosti
koja se događa u neposrednome kontaktu s publikom.
Sve vrijeme školovanja nisam se usudila razmišljati o sebi
kao autorici. Sazrijevanje u tome smislu trajalo je mnogo dulje,
zbog ogromne količine odgovornosti koju sam osjećala da
uloga autora, kao nekoga tko ima sveobuhvatni pogled na
izvedbu, sa sobom nosi. Najprije sam trebala shvatiti što meni
zapravo znači izvedba, situacija predstave i zašto je ples moj
medij. Ili makar otvoriti ta pitanja, jer ih ni do danas nisam
apsolvirala. No za pristup koji ne želi preuzeti tuđe danosti,
već ih dovodi u pitanje, potrebni su i vrijeme i zrelost.
¬ Nakon akademije nastojala si se ustaliti na njemačkoj
plesnoj sceni. Po čemu pamtiš to razdoblje?
To je bilo gorko iskustvo. Teško je postaviti prioritete u
životu kada je čovjek posve bez novaca i kada je negdje sam.
Najprije moraš riješiti osnovnu egzistenciju, što zapravo znači
da umjetničke preokupacije nisu u prvome planu. Kada sam
završila akademiju, tražila sam posao i obišla stotine gradskih
kazališta, svaki sam vikend bila na jednoj ili dvjema audicijama. Tražila sam u prvome redu posao na temelju kojega
bih dobila papire, dakle ne posao u nezavisnoj skupini, nego
posao u kazalištu, jer građanin države koja nije u Europskoj
uniji, što sam tada bila, u nezavisnoj skupini ne može dobiti
radnu dozvolu. Tražila sam gotovo svagdje i nikako da me
netko uzme. Kada putuješ s takvom očajničkom namjerom,
neće te nitko ni uzeti. Konkurencija je nevjerojatna, to su hrpe
i hrpe ljudi koje putuju Njemačkom i traže posao, iz cijele
Europe, Latinske Amerike, Azije, sa svih strana. Imati posao
kao plesač u Njemačkoj potkraj 1990-ih bio je egzistencijalni
prestiž, plesači nigdje ne žive tako dobro kao u Njemačkoj.
Njemačka državna kazališta uglavnom zapošljavaju plesače
kojima je osnova klasična tehnika, a onda plešu ono što angažirani koreograf od njih traži, primjerice Stephan Thoss ili
Gregor Zöllig, koji najčešće rade predstave koje su nasljeđe
plesnoga teatra. I dan-danas državna kazališta funkcioniraju
tako. One druge, progresivne stvari u Njemačkoj događaju se
na nezavisnoj sceni. I tako sam kružila Njemačkom, a pritom
sam u privatnim baletnim školama držala satove i istodobno
radila kao konobarica. Na kraju sam upala u skupinu Desperate Figures Dance Theater u Mainzu, koja je bila nezavisna
skupina, ali su mi uspjeli isposlovati neku vrstu ugovora preko
kazališta Mainzer Kammerspiele. Onda sam dobila posao
u Frankfurtu, u operi Osvajanje Meksika prema Antoninu
Artaudu, što je više bilo statiranje nego plesanje, ali sam
prihvatila, isključivo zato što sam time dobila i zdravstveno
osiguranje bez kojega sam u međuvremenu ostala. I onda
sam se skršila na probi i s masovnom povredom završila u
razgovor: Silvija Marchig bolnici. Više nisam mogla ići na audicije, nisam mogla raditi,
ostala sam bez radne dozvole, bez ičega. Nisam mogla ni
hodati šest mjeseci. A tim tempom dovela sam si život do
takve kulminacije da više nisam mogla tako živjeti. Kao da
mi je trebalo nešto da me lupi po glavi pa da stanem. Tada
sam se vratila u Hrvatsku. Razmišljala sam još neko vrijeme
o Njemačkoj, u Nürnbergu sam još radila na predstavici Eve
Koch, sa šipkom u nozi, ali je Iva Nerina Sibila, koju sam znala
iz Trafika, počela s probama za predstavu s deset plesačica i
tražila – plesačice. Projekt je na kraju otpao, a ja sam ostala
u Zagrebu.
¬
I onda si naišla na Ekscenu?
Da, onda sam uletjela u Ekscenu. U Zagreb sam stvarno
došla bez plana, nisam namjeravala ostati petnaest godina.
¬ Kako danas gledaš na otvoreni model organizacije u
kojoj svatko odlučuje koliko će se i kako angažirati u osmišljavanju programa i projekata i vođenju organizacije, na
horizontalno odlučivanje i raspodjelu odgovornosti? Od
inicijative Poziv na preuzimanje i akcije samoukidanja tadašnjeg koordinacijskog tima prošlo je gotovo devet godina,
a ti si Ekscenu2 napustila i prije toga.
Takav model organizacije bio je tada, kao i sada, progresivan i vrlo plodan. Radeći unutar Ekscene učila sam se
odgovornosti i samostalnosti. Također sam počela intenzivnije
promišljati širi društveni kontekst unutar kojeg se događa
plesna umjetnost te razumijevati estetiku koja je posljedica
samoorganizirajućih suradnji koje negiraju konzervativne hijerarhije u procesima. Od kolegica na Eksceni i zajedno s njima
naučila sam mnogo i otvorila sva važna pitanja kojima se i
danas bavim. Ne bih rekla da sam napustila Ekscenu; napustila
sam rad u koordinacijskome timu, nakon četiri godine došlo
je do iscrpljivanja i usmjerila sam se više prema umjetničkome
radu. I prema majčinstvu, negdje u to doba. Tadašnje članice
2
Nekolicina plesnih umjetnica potkraj 2001. osnovala je Eksperimentalnu slobodnu scenu vodeći se idejom slobodne platforme
koja podupire razvoj svih postojećih inicijativa na sceni, osiguravajući izvedbenim umjetnicima nužne uvjete za rad i razmjenu
informacija te ustrajavajući na nehijerarhijskome modelu, na
horizontalnoj raspodjeli odgovornosti i ravnopravnosti u donošenju
odluka u programskome planiranju i vođenju organizacije. Tijekom
pet godina platforma izrasta u usustavljen samoorganizacijski,
edukativni, informativni i izvedbeni prostor. Istodobno sa širenjem
opsega aktivnosti i multipliciranjem programskih i projektnih razina dolazi do zamora modela te koordinacijski tim 2006. objavljuje
Poziv na preuzimanje, prepuštajući koordinaciju novim snagama koje
bi imale jasniju viziju kako dalje razvijati ili restrukturirati postojeći model u skladu s trenutačnim potrebama scene. Nakon Poziva na
preuzimanje Ekscena se više usmjerila produkcijskom djelovanju, a
2013. oformio se novi koordinacijski tim koji se, slijedeći naznačene
smjernice organizacije, aktivirao, iako prilično utišano, oko revitalizacije pojedinih programskih segmenata.
koordinacijskoga tima, Selma Banich, Sandra Banić, Zrinka
Užbinec, Maja Marjančić, Željka Sančanin, i dalje su moje
bliske kolegice i prijateljice čija mi je potpora iznimno važna.
¬ Jesu li ti Ekscena i okružje koje je stvorila, organiziranjem svakodnevnih treninga i radionica, osiguravanjem
prostora za rad i izvedbe, povezivanjem s drugim umjetnicima i organizacijama itd., bili ključan poticaj da se odvažiš
na autorsko stvaranje, jer tu već govorimo i o tvojim prvim
autorskim radovima?
Apsolutno, intenzivno druženje i rad na Eksceni bili su prvi
poticaj za autorsko stvaranje. Otvorio se prostor za istraživanje i za izvedbe prvih radova, u Eksceninu projektu WARP
na primjer. U Eksceni dogodile su se brojne suradnje i važni
razgovori, zajednički smo pomicali granice postojeće plesne
tradicije u Zagrebu, i u strukturnome i u estetskom smislu.
Zasigurno dijelimo mnogo toga što nas čini pripadnicima
tzv. zagrebačke scene, iako smo se kao autori(ce) razvijale
autonomno i poštovanje autonomije ostao je jedan od prioriteta među nama.
Stvaranje iz mjesta boli
d tvojih prvih autorskih radova, Autos (2003), Kardioadapter (2004), Lijevo bedro (2005), do novijih
kao što su Ovo (ni)je moja šuma (2010), nastao u
suautorskoj suradnji s Darkom Japeljem i Natašom Govedić,
ili posljednji solo Dokle god smo zajedno (2014) trauma i
bol isplivavaju kao tvoje stalne preokupacije.
Doživljavam bol kao najintenzivniji osjet, traumu kao
najintenzivniju motivaciju za kreaciju. Ne želim se terapeutski
baviti time, nastojim izbjeći autobiografski pristup, odnosno
koristiti se vlastitim traumama i boli, a da ne promislim okvir,
kontekst, način na koji se iznose. Ako je bol ishodište, rad se
sastoji od potrage za razumijevanjem mjesta boli i traume
i njihovim intenzitetom iz kojega bi se moglo kreirati nešto
drugo jednako tako intenzivno, odnosno blisko tomu intenzitetu, uvijek u međuprostoru komunikacije s gledateljem,
odnosno partnerima na sceni.
O
¬ Na Postprodukcijskom coachingu u ožujku ove godine,
koji su organizirale Željka Sančanin i Martina Granić, u
sklopu kojega si održala otvorenu probu za novi projekt
Glečer, kao poveznicu sa Sylvijom Plath spomenula si preuzimanje tuđe boli. Podijeliti bol, iskupiti se za nekoga,
iskupiti umjesto nekoga drugoga.
Postupak identifikacije, dijeljenje, empatija – sve su to
riječi koje označavaju meni važne procese u izvedbi. Identifikaciju s nekim umjetnikom smatram moćnim postupkom,
iako ne mislim da je riječ o nečem binarnom, to je kompleksna
pojava. U konkretnome primjeru sa Sylvijom Plath posrijedi
je igra preuzimanja identiteta. Kada tijekom izvedbe pustim
Movements 23 | 24 _ 115
snimku njezina razgovora u kojem ju sugovornik pita: „Sylvia,
što vas je potaknulo na pisanje prvih pjesama?”, zabavlja
me mogućnost zamjene identiteta koju ta situacija pruža,
na najbanalnijoj razini. To mi otvara vrata u izvedbu kojoj je
ishodište moja vlastita bol, koja postaje i njezinom i mojom i
onoga koji gleda, nije više privatna, nego se događa za vrijeme izvedbe u realnome vremenu, između nas. Naravno, Sylvia
Plath u izvedbi je iz složenijih razloga nego što je dijeljenje
imena, no ta prva razina identifikacije otvara mogućnost za
izvedbeni zavrtanj. U ranijim radovima vraćala sam se na konkretne događaje iz svoje prošlosti, tematizirala ih, stavljala ih
u naslove predstava i slično, što je bio neartikulirani pokušaj
da se dođe do izravne komunikacije plesnom izvedbom. Nikad nisam imala potrebu dijeljenja vlastitih autobiografskih
podataka. Kada sam tijekom otvorene probe u Muzeju suvremene umjetnosti, koju spominješ, pričala o prijatelju koji je
dobio otkaz jer se sa svojim zrelim godinama ne uklapa u sliku
mlada ansambla ili o koreografkinji s kojom sam radila, a koja
je umrla od tumora na mozgu, nisam namjeravala ispričati
osobnu priču ili iznijeti biografski podatak. Zanima me koliko
se iz bolnoga mjesta u tome trenutku može dogoditi nešto
novo, živo. To jest neka vrsta iskupljenja, nazovimo to tako.
¬ Koliko si time kao izvođačica ranjivija, kada stvaraš
otvarajući se iz točke bola?
Sigurno sam ranjivija, ali to mi je zanimljivo, uzbudljivo.
No tu postoji i moralno pitanje, kako se uopće takve teme
otvaraju, kako se otvaraju teme koje se tiču samoga izvođača,
kakav angažman to zahtijeva od onoga tko gleda tvoje izlaganje. Ako govorimo o izloženosti, i publika je jako izložena
kada se na sceni iznose neke osobne činjenice. Kada govorim
o smrti svoga oca primjerice, to je moralno pitanje, ne samo
iz moje pozicije, jer mi je problem o tome govoriti, nego u
odnosu na to kako se takav osobni iskaz gleda, sluša. Zanimljiv mi je proces traženja načina na koji se to može izvesti,
ispričati, razotkriti kao ishodište kojim se bavim. Intimno i
bolno mjesto teško je približiti nekomu drugom, zapravo
nepoznatom.
¬ Svaka je rana i trauma jedinstvena i ne dokraja iskaziva,
ali svi imamo neko bolno mjesto, svi smo negdje načeti,
slabi i upravo se zato tako nešto intimno može shvatiti i
kao opće mjesto.
Da, no za prijenos snažnih afekata potrebno je stvoriti
područje međusobna povjerenja ili pak angažirana gledanja.
Tada više nije važno je li posrijedi fikcija ili dokumentarni iskaz.
Kada umjetnici performansa, Marina Abramović ili Siniša Labrović na primjer, sami sebe bičuju, oni dovode gledatelja u
rubno područje u kojem se gubi granica treba li to tretirati kao
performans ili kao situaciju u kojoj je gledatelj suodgovoran
za događanje, zbog realne opasnosti za zdravlje izvođača.
116 _ Kretanja 23 | 24
Usporedivo s time, u trenutku kada pričam o nekoj osobnoj
traumi, koja može i ne mora biti istinita, ali je iznosim kao
da je istinita, ulazim u granično područje dokumentarnoga i
izvedbenoga. Mislim da su ta liminalna područja stvarnosti
najjača područja prijenosa. U radu s Via Negativom 3 često
smo bili na toj granici. Meni je jednako moćno i gledati i
izvoditi u toj zoni, jer je angažirajuće, ali postavlja i političko
pitanje koju vrstu zajednice moramo prethodno uspostaviti da
bi takve stvari mogle izaći, da bismo mogli podijeliti intimu.
¬
Kako se kao izvođačica nosiš sa starenjem tijela?
Nije mi svejedno. To je intrigantno na jedan način kada
imaš trideset godina, na drugi kada imaš četrdeset, na treći,
pretpostavljam, kada imaš pedeset. Propadanje tijela surovo je i neizbježno. Naravno da starenje nosi i drugu vrstu
bogatstva, iskustvo se taloži. Hvata me jeza kada sa sadašnjim stanjem uma počnem razmišljati o tome kakvo će mi
tijelo biti za dvadeset godina. S drukčijim se stanjem uma
drukčije s time nosiš, to me tješi. No ne mogu reći da sam
imuna kada me nakon dviju proba počne, na primjer, boljeti
koljeno zbog nečeg što prije deset godina ne bih ni osjetila.
Krhkost i ranjivost tijela zanimljive su mi kao tema, a s druge
su strane tako ograničavajuće. U mladosti sam imala povredu
zbog koje sam naučila nositi se s krhkošću tijela, to mi je dalo
neku drugu snagu.
Zasebna je tema činjenica da sam jedna od najstarijih
plesačica na našoj sceni, i to već dugo. U Hrvatskoj gotovo
da i nema aktivnih plesačica starijih od četrdeset, pretpostavljam ponajprije zato jer si to nitko tako dugo ne može
priuštiti. Ne opterećujem se time previše. S četrdeset više nisi
ona plesačica koja ima vječnih univerzalnih dvadeset i pet.
Zaoštrava se pitanje motivacije: zašto si na sceni, zašto se
izlažeš. S godinama pitanja kojima se baviš i intencija postaju
nužno radikalnijima i važnijima.
Plesačica prije svega
ako doživljavaš poziciju izvođačice, kada samo izvodiš tuđu koreografiju ili predstavu?
Dugo nisam bila u takvoj situaciji. U posljednje
vrijeme s kim god sam radila posrijedi je bilo suautorstvo, u
kojem stojim iza svoje konkretne građe. Volim raditi s ljudima
i odlično mi je biti u nečijem svijetu i nečiju ideju interpretirati
na svoj način, ponuditi odgovor. No nikad mi nije bilo lako
K
3
Via Negativa istraživačka je, razvojna i produkcijska platforma
suvremenih izvedbenih umjetnosti pokrenuta 2002. prema radnoj
metodi Borisa Jablanovca, njezina osnivača i umjetničkog voditelja.
Sjedište joj je u Ljubljani, a suradnike okuplja na međunarodnoj
razini sa svakim novim projektom kao grupu pojedinaca koje povezuje zajednički interes prema istraživanju izvedbenih umjetnosti i
izvođačkih strategija.
razgovor: Silvija Marchig izvršavati nečiju koreografiju, u smislu kopiranja pokreta.
Teško ulazim u građu koja proizlazi iz drugoga tijela. To mi
je teže nego plesati balet, u kojem su plesni elementi kao
nekakvo javno dobro, zadana forma iz koje se slažu razne
kombinacije. Kada splasne fascinacija tuđim pokretom i želja
da se on otjelovi, dovodi se u pitanje smisao takva izvođenja.
¬ Kada se sama nađeš u poziciji koreografa, kako izvođačima približavaš ideju koju želiš realizirati, kako se odvija
prijenos građe između tebe i izvođača?
Kada sam se počela autorski baviti plesom, pokušala sam
spojiti sebe kao autoricu i izvođače koji izvode moj rad. I to
samo jednom, u predstavi Kardioadapter u kojoj plešu Zrinka
Šimičić Mihanović i Maja Marjančić. Bez obzira na uspješnost
i moju ljubav prema tome radu, shvatila sam da poziciju autora izvedbe koju sama ne izvodim zapravo ne razumijem,
jer sam ja u prvome redu plesačica, odnosno izvođačica.
Katkad se prigodno nađem u poziciji koreografkinje u radu
sa srednjoškolcima kojima predajem, tada pokušavam plesače
voditi u procesu u kojem sami istražuju pokret i na taj način
gradimo koreografiju. Nekoliko puta angažirali su me kao
koreografkinju u dramskim predstavama. Tu sam također
pokušala voditi izvođače (glumce) u svojevrsnom istraživanju, no za to obično nedostaje vremena i prostora. Formalno
postavljanje koraka na ritam, glazbu i učenje nekoga tomu,
stvaranje figura i geometrijskih formacija – to nije moja domena. Po potrebi sam se snašla, recimo.
¬ S kojim ti je koreografima ili drugim suradnicima kao
izvođačici, odnosno suautorici poticajno surađivati?
Od suradnji u kojima sam bila angažirana kao plesačica
najprije moram spomenuti Nancy Seitz-McIntyre koja mi
je dala prvi vjetar u leđa nakon akademije angažirajući me
u svojoj skupini Desperate Figures Dance Company. Ona
je koreografiji pristupala intuitivno, zaigrano, radili smo iz
objekata, iz situacija, katkad iz glazbe. Potom Irma Omerzo,
čija su mi posvećenost i povjerenje koje pruža plesačima bili
neprocjenjivo vrijedni. Otkako sam se vratila u Hrvatsku,
zaplela sam se duboko u scenu: moja riječka veza proteže se
još od srednjoškolskih dana i Labisa, čiji su članovi bili i Žak
Valenta, Gordana Svetopetrić i Edvin Liverić, s kojima i danas
surađujem u Trafiku 4 . U Trafiku sam upoznala i Ivu Nerinu
Sibilu, s kojom danas veoma intenzivno surađujem u IMRC-
4
Kao tranzicijsko-fikcijsko kazalište Trafik su u Rijeci 1998.
osnovali Magdalena Lupi (umjetnička voditeljica), Žak Branko Valenta, Iva Nerina Sibila, Edvin Liverić, Alex Đaković, Lara Badurina,
Ivan Šarar i Boba Bundalo. Trafik je tijekom godina proširio mrežu
stalnih i povremenih suradnika raznih umjetničkih određenja, estetikom spajajući fizičko kazalište, mimu, suvremeni ples, vizualno
kazalište i kazalište na specifičnoj lokaciji.
u 5 i na drugim projektima. Pratimo se i podupiremo i kada
radimo odvojeno. Slično je i s Milom Čuljak, Selmom Banich,
Magdalenom Lupi, Josipom Maršićem, Marinom Alvirom –
također trafikantima. Mi smo kao neka obitelj, čak i kada se
ne vidimo dulja razdoblja. Radeći u skupini Kik Melone na
vlastitim autorskim projektima, ostvarila sam suradnje koje
se izgrađuju u dugogodišnje veze uzajamna učenja i potpore:
s Darkom Japeljem, Natašom Govedić, Pavlom Heidlerom...
Jednako sam tako dugogodišnje vezana i uz organizaciju Četveroruka Marine Petković Liker i Sonje Pregrad. Zahvaljujući
suradnjama intenzivne povezanosti i uzajamna povjerenja,
kao što su navedene, teško bih u budućnosti mogla pristati
na išta manje.
¬ Što tebi znači izvoditi, izvoditi za sebe, izvoditi za drugoga, i kako poimaš izvođenje u svakodnevnim situacijama
u odnosu na izvođenje koje se percipira kao izvedba?
Izvođenja u svakodnevnim situacijama katkad sam svjesna, no često nisam ili ne marim za to. Društveno uvjetovana
performativnost, ako o tome govorimo, jako je zanimljivo područje, ali rijetko to vežem uz izvedbu u kazališnome smislu.
Kazališna izvedba za mene je specifična komunikacija među
ljudima, povišena intenziteta. Izvedba se događa istodobno
i za mene i za druge, događa se između nas. Ako se dislocira
iz tog prostora između, postaje problematičnom. Strašno mi
je stresno kada se tijekom izvedbe dogodi blokada u komunikaciji. Prisutnost na sceni i nijanse svjesnosti dok izvodim
jesu teme kojima se bavim. Prije osam godina mislila sam da
je moja opsesivna potreba za izvođenjem bliska ekshibicionizmu pa je i nastala predstava Ekshibicija, u suautorstvu s
Andrejom Košavić i Majom Marjančić, ali ekshibicionizam je
jednosmjeran, za razliku od izvedbe koja je dijeljenje. Nikad
nisam imala problema s izlaganjem nesigurnosti ili ranjivosti
na sceni. Ne mislim da izvedba mora biti savršena da bi se
izvela pred publikom, baš suprotno, pukotine u izvedbi pridonose ljudskosti, nesavršenstvu, koje omogućuje uspostavu
odnosa povjerenja i empatije.
¬ Kada izvodiš svoj rad, percipiraš li sebe kao izvođačicu
ili kao autoricu?
U trenutku izvođenja to mi je jedno te isto. Kada izvodim
u nekoj predstavi koju netko autorski potpisuje, uzmimo za
primjer Trisolistice Irme Omerzo, u tome trenutku ja sam
također autorica, autorica te izvedbe, iako je ona autorica
predstave. Izvedba je autorski čin. Sve drugo može se nazivati
autorstvom u koreografiji, režiji, dramaturgiji, autorstvom u
5
Integrirani kolektiv za istraživanje pokreta (IMRC od engl.
Integrated Movement Research Collective) djeluje od 2012. pod
vodstvom Ive Nerine Sibile i Amele Pašalić i okuplja plesače s tjelesnim invaliditetom i plesače bez tjelesnih oštećenja.
Movements 23 | 24 _ 117
konceptu, ali izvedba je autorstvo čovjeka koji je na sceni.
Zato mi je čudno biti autoricom koja nije na sceni, jer nisam
ništa od svega navedenoga, nego sam plesačica.
¬ A postavljaš li se drukčije kada stvaraš vlastite predstave
i kada stvaraš u suautorstvu?
Kada sudjelujem kao izvođačica u nečijem radu, opuštenija sam jer drugomu predajem odgovornost za razloge zašto
se nešto radi, ja sam tu da ponudim građu, da sudjelujem u
tome što se i kako radi. Zašto se nešto radi, ključno je pitanje i osjećam veliku odgovornost kada sam sama autorica. S
obzirom na to da su uglavnom posrijedi suautorske suradnje,
što se i kako radi naše je zajedničko pitanje i stvar pregovora. Bez obzira na poziciju, prihvaćam se svoga dijela veoma
odgovorno. Nikad si ne dopuštam doći na probu nepripremljena, bilo da sam autorica i producentica projekta ili samo
suradnica za kostime.
pratiti referencijalnost predstave i događanja na sceni tumači
posve drukčije od nekoga tko sve to može povezati znanjem,
iskustvom. Zapravo jako volim inteligentne autore i predstave, ali nikako ne volim predstave – intelektualne akrobacije
– koje ciljaju isključivo na racionalno razumijevanje. Doživljaj
iz trbuha daleko je moćniji.
¬
Kako izabireš suradnike?
Najčešće intuitivno. Suradnji uvijek prethode susreti, pojavi se jasna želja za zajedničkim radom.
¬
Što te potakne?
Neki zajednički interes, međusobno razumijevanje, fascinacija. Često se dogodi da mi netko nešto kaže ili pokaže
nešto što me iznenadi, nešto što mi je novo, neočekivano. To
mi je velika motivacija. Ne moramo nužno biti istomišljenici.
¬
¬
Kako se pripremaš?
Pripreme često uključuju promišljanje, čitanje, istraživanje. Rastvaranje pitanja, analize, maštanje. Pod pripremom
prije svega podrazumijevam stanje uma kakvo imam kada
dolazim na probu. Ako sam sama autorica, doći ću sigurno
s nekakvim planom ili barem s prvom propozicijom, s više
ili manje artikuliranom željom što bih htjela iskušati, odakle
krenuti. Trudim se biti iskrena prema sebi i prema drugima i
slušati autentične potrebe, a ne fantazirati o nečijim ili vlastitim očekivanjima. Trudim se biti otvorena i pažljiva. Kada sam
samo izvođačica, donekle sam opuštenija, mekša u pristupu,
ali koncentracija je zapravo jednaka.
Autorska i estetička pregovaranja
to te provocira izvedbeno, istraživački, autorski, društveno, politički?
Zanimaju me ljudi, odnosi među ljudima. Bavim se
izvedbenošću u smislu intenzivne i kompleksne komunikacije.
To mi je stalna tema, kako joj pristupam, ovisi o projektu.
Afekti i osjećaji, stavovi, odnosi, strukture, ustroji, to su sve
koreografske teme. Ima istine u romantičnoj predodžbi da
tijelom komuniciramo nešto posve drugo nego što komuniciramo riječima. Trenutačno mi je u žarištu odnos tijela i riječi,
odnosno kazališnog znaka, istodobno s time odnos neposredna osjetilnog doživljaja i procesiranoga, racionalnoga.
Prije sam nastojala stvarati iz razumijevanja sustava znakova
koji zajednički komuniciraju nešto. Čini mi se da trenutačno
pojednostavnjujem sustav znakova, ljuštim slojeve značenja
tako da dođem što bliže tomu što komunicira tijelo. Blisko
je to utopiji povratka nevinosti doživljenoga. Što, naravno,
nije moguće – tko je jednom uronjen u sustav znakova, ne
može se isprati. Uzmimo za primjer Labuđe jezero Raimunda
Hoghea, publika koja nije upućena u povijest plesa ne može
Š
118 _ Kretanja 23 | 24
Kakve metode primjenjuješ u stvaralačkome radu?
Metoda i mogu li je imenovati za mene su otvoreno pitanje. Eksperimentirala sam s time i vodeći radionice, da vidim
kako se metoda mijenja u različitoj skupini ljudi, kada to nisu
bliski suradnici. Ne mogu stvoriti odmak da bih to ispravno analizirala. Posljednjih godina događa mi se da se radovi
nastavljaju jedni na druge, to bi se također moglo nazvati
metodom, pitanje koje se otvori kao ključno na završetku
jednoga procesa postaje pitanjem kojim započinjem sljedeći
proces. Diktat financiranja svake godine uvjetuje da izađemo s predstavom, a možda je to sve jedan te isti proces koji
će produktom rezultirati tek za deset godina. Ili neće nikad.
Ne mislim da su zbog toga moje predstave probni radovi,
ne koristim se time kao opravdanjem za nedovršenost, to
su uvijek gotovi radovi, ali su dio većega procesa. U dvorani
mi se čini vrlo učinkovitim tretirati probe kao izvedbe, što
podrazumijeva potpunu koncentraciju i dulje etape, rad na
izvedbenosti. Suprotno tome bilo bi iskušavanje odvojenih
scena, montaža dijelova. Zanimljivo je omogućiti radu da se
odmotava sam od sebe i da se ne odjeljuje izvedba od razgovora o izvedbi. To želim dalje razvijati, u sljedećem radu
to dvoje želim spojiti u jedno.
¬ Nailaziš li tijekom procesa na poteškoće ili specifične
situacije koje se ponavljaju? Ne mislim pritom na vanjske
uvjete, podfinanciranost ili neadekvatne prostore, nego na
sam proces.
Poteškoće su istodobno i izazovi. Jedna od njih svakako je istodobnost proizvodnje i autorefleksije. Nemoguće je
istodobno ući duboko u proces i zadržati odmak koji omogućava analizu. Odnosno nije, ali podrazumijeva drugu vrstu
subjektivnosti. Darko Japelj i ja sudjelovali smo kao autori i
izvođači u Karuselu 2009. i bili sami u procesu, a 2010. radili
smo predstavu Ovo (ni)je moja šuma i 2011. Glory, Glory,
razgovor: Silvija Marchig Hamlelujah! u suradnji s Natašom Govedić, također autoricom, ali koja nije izvodila. Ta dva načina rada jako su različita.
S jedne strane prisutnost vanjskog oka uvelike olakšava rad,
ono je potpora, žarište, svjedok koji bilježi i vidi ono što bi
nam promaknulo, nudi novi sadržaj izvedenom. Istodobno,
ono preuzima dio odgovornosti za donošenje odluka, svojim
gledanjem utječe na izvedbu i prije bilo kakve izgovorene
povratne informacije. Balansiranje između pojedinih odluka
autora izvođača i autora svjedoka (dramaturga) zahtijeva
veliki angažman, međusobno povjerenje, toleranciju, samokritičnost – kao i svaka druga intenzivna emotivna veza
među ljudima.
¬ Solo (ženski) slovi za ishodišnu formu u suvremenome
plesu kojom autorice propituju vlastiti umjetnički izričaj
i identitet, čini se da zasad prednost ipak daješ grupnom
radu?
Volim biti s ljudima i raditi u grupi. Kada se i dogodi da
radim solo izvedbu, nosim utjecaj svih ljudi s kojima sam
radila posljednjih godina. Moja posljednja sola uključuju
izravan odnos s publikom, nisu sola u kojima sam posve
sama. Ne znam, valjda ne znam raditi sama. Nikad nisam
napravila nešto u čemu sam stvarno sama. Možda hoću. Ne
zazirem od toga, ali mi dosad nije bilo zanimljivo. U Dokle
god smo zajedno, solu koji sam radila za 15 minuta Trafika i
Četverorukost – malu izvedbenu konferenciju Sonje Pregrad
i Marine Petković Liker, u zrcalu gledam publiku, izvedba
nastaje iz izravne komunikacije. Kao i u solu u MSU-u, za
polazište uzimam izvedbu kao medij koji se formira u odnosu s publikom.
¬ Osim oko raspodjele moći, moći u donošenju odluke,
oko čega još najčešće pregovarate tijekom procesa kada je
posrijedi grupno autorstvo?
Pregovaramo o prioritetima koje svatko od nas ima, o
motivacijama, o vizijama o tome što zajedno radimo. Sve više
vjerujem u supostojanje i uvažavanje u suradnjama, sve manje mi se čini bitnim da se moramo slagati u svim točkama.
¬ Shvaćaš li improvizaciju kao koreografsko sredstvo, samostalnu disciplinu ili?
Meni je improvizacija koreografsko sredstvo. Taj termin
zapravo rijetko upotrebljavam. Ako moram imenovati postupak dok radim nešto novo, zovem to jednostavno radom,
kreacijom, istraživanjem. Improvizacija implicira specifičnu
formu, ona to i jest. Naravno da je odlično da se improvizacija
afirmira i njeguje kao scenska forma ili samostalna disciplina,
ali mene to manje zanima. U trenutku izvedbe zanimljivo mi
je improvizirati, ali ne zato što je to improvizacija u odmaku
od pisane koreografije. Ne fascinira me improvizacija kao
suprotnost zapisanoj koreografskoj građi, ne bavim se time.
¬ Na otvorenu probu Glečera u MSU-u došla si s nekim
tezama i približnim planom, ali ostavila si mnogo slobode
za istraživanje nepoznata prostora i situacije – nisi znala tko
će doći i hoće li ti ljudi koji se pojave biti preprekom ili će ti
nešto dati. Nisi krenula od strukture koju bi punila sadržajem, nego si od toga možebitnog sadržaja ili praznine, koja
se također može shvatiti kao sadržaj, na licu mjesta stvarala
strukturu, odnosno koordinirala događanje. Također mi se
činilo da si unaprijed odlučila što želiš verbalizirati i dok si
se posvetila izgovaranju pripovjednih sadržaja, pustila si
tijelo da te vodi i kreće se kako želi, barem je tako izgledalo,
pretpostavljam da si i riječi i kretnje podjednako kontrolirala.
Govoriti i istodobno improvizirati tijelom složeno je, ali
izazovno. U nekoliko posljednjih radova to mi se pokazalo
kao zanimljiv postupak. Na toj sam probi htjela istražiti živo
tkivo izvedbe koje se stvara u trenutku izvođenja svih nas
zajedno i nisam si mogla točno zacrtati što ću proći jer sam
htjela da to što prolazim bude uvjetovano odgovorom drugih,
odbacila sam iluziju da se stvari predviđaju unaprijed. Ne pravim okvire da bih onda unutar okvira nešto gradila. Moram
najprije shvatiti što je sadržaj da bih mogla postaviti okvir,
odnosno formirati okvir u situaciji, u sprezi s publikom. Zato
mi je teško raditi kao suradnica za scenski pokret u dramskim
predstavama, popunjavati mjesta za koreografiju. U početku
imam neku vrstu generatora građe, ne znam dokle želim doći,
ali znam što mi je teza ili pitanje ili trenutačna propozicija koju
bih htjela istražiti s određenim ljudima. Najčešće se događa
da propoziciju postavim u obliku izvedbenoga fenomena.
¬
Relacije tijela, prostora i glazbe?
Moje ishodište kreacije u domeni je izvedbenoga, zapravo
u fenomenu izvođenja. Odnos tijela, prostora i glazbe nije u
žarištu. Oni su tu i njima se bavim, mogu također biti i sadržaj, ali zapravo rjeđe. Prostor je realna danost, geometrijski
prostor, ali i mentalni – imaginarna arhitektura. Dijalogom s
glazbom dosad sam se bavila u Kardioadapteru, u kojem smo
autorski surađivali sa skladateljem Svenom Pavlovićem, koji
je stvarao glazbu za predstavu iz svoga autorskog impulsa,
te u Autosu, u kojem smo Igor Hofbauer za bubnjevima i ja
u ravnopravnu izvedbenom odnosu. U Ložaču sunca Monika
Gajić svirala je uživo, dogodio se poseban dijalog opsesija
pokretom i zvukom, Nenad Hrgetić skladao je autorsku glazbu za Glory, Glory, također autonomno pristupajući temi. U
Karuselu, Ovo (ni)je moja šuma, Exotici glazbi smo pristupali
najprije konceptualno. Iako, Monteverdijev Orfej u prvom
dijelu Šume nosi takav emocionalni naboj da prelazi preko
svih očekivanih okvira postavljenog koncepta. U Il bastone
del diavolo Mila Čuljak i ja htjele smo plesati na revolucionarne pjesme Giovanne Daffini, da si priuštimo zadovoljstvo
i dopuštenje plesanja na glazbu. Na kraju smo na glazbu
držali štap. S jedne smo strane opet konceptualno pristupile
Movements 23 | 24 _ 119
glazbi jer nismo uzele Giovannu Daffini da bismo uronile u
njezin zvuk, nego radi riječi koje nose revolucionarne poruke, s druge strane mnogo nam znači vibracija njezina glasa.
Nije samo stvar teksta i poruke, nego nečega što je ispod
toga i što je neizrecivo, što glazba izbacuje neposredno u
slušatelja. Zanima me kako će to biti u sljedećem radu u
kojem ćemo surađivati sa skladateljicom Anom Horvat, koja
će istodobno i izvoditi.
Različite vrste odgovornosti
ako promišljaš formu?
Smatram da me forma ne zanima, ali sam svjesna
da su forma i sadržaj međusobno uvjetovani. Bavim
se sadržajem, forma je posljedica. Ne razumijem i ne volim
estetizaciju, formalizam – pod time smatram bavljenje oblikom, izgledom, stilom bez suštinskog razloga. Bavim s time
ako je u funkciji sadržaja. Majstori forme za mene su majstori
sadržaja – kada su u radu forma i sadržaj neodvojivi.
K
¬ U posljednje vrijeme baratamo pojmom koreografske prakse. Kako definiraš praksu prema koreografiji u
širem smislu, dakle ne samo prema koreografiji u smislu
kompozicije?
Koreografija je organizacija tijela, prostora i vremena.
Tim se postupkom bavim, ali mi je problem reći da sam koreografkinja, mislim da se možda nedovoljno bavim istraživanjem forme da bih to mogla izjaviti. Teško mi je odrediti
samu sebe. Kao što sam rekla da sam imala krizu identiteta
jer nisam mogla izgovoriti da sam balerina, tako postoji i kriza
identiteta kada trebam izjaviti da sam koreografkinja. Nisam
nikad formalno proučavala iskušane načine organizacije tijela
u prostoru i vremenu, malo se diletantski osjećam kada krenem definirati što to meni znači. Pojam koreografske prakse
smatram usmjerenim na proces, ne na djelo. Na trajanje, ne
nužno na funkciju uprizorenja. To je termin nove generacije,
neka je oni definiraju.
¬
Znači, više se priklanjaš pojmu autorske prakse?
Ako moram definirati svoj rad, to čime se bavim, da.
¬ Pod koreografijom u širem smislu mislim na rastezljivost
plesa, na činjenicu da pokret u plesu uzmiče pred drugim
elementima izvedbe, ne uvijek i ne u svih autora, ali se ples
često odriče plesnosti ili ju svodi na minimum, a koreografski se interes usmjerava problematiziranju izvedbenih
procedura, medija, modela autorstva, uvjeta rada i slično,
uzimajući u obzir postojeće modele funkcioniranja društva
i sagledavajući izvedbene umjetnosti izvana.
Sve ovisi o žarištu. Ako je u središtu tijelo u prostoru i
vremenu, valjda je to koreografija, odnosno ples. Razgovor
o plesu može biti ples ako nam je pritom pozornost na pozi-
120 _ Kretanja 23 | 24
cioniranju tijela za vrijeme razgovora, a ako je pozornost na
nečem drugom, razgovor može biti i, na primjer, sociološko
istraživanje jer je u žarištu dvoje ili više ljudi koji razgovaraju
o plesu.
¬
Nazivaš li to čime se baviš plesom?
Da. Zato što je još u žarištu tijelo koje je autonomno od
racionalnoga. Ali nije to samo ples. I da, sigurno je prije autorska praksa nego koreografska, u pravu si.
¬ Nemoguće je zaključivati nešto definitivno o sadašnjosti i procesima koji su tijeku, ali pretpostavljam da imaš
predodžbu o svome pozicioniranju i pozicioniranju tvoga
rada unutar scene?
Nisam nikad imala potrebu dijeliti interes s velikom grupom ljudi. Moja motivacija bavljenja plesom uvijek mi je bila
važnija nego to čime se bave drugi ljudi. Kik Melone osnovala
sam s Igorom Hofbauerom zato što mi nije bilo lako naći
nekoga od kolega s kim bih osnovala skupinu, jer to nosi
odgovornost da s tom osobom želim raditi sljedećih, recimo, petnaestak godina. Odlučila sam osnovati umjetničku
organizaciju s kolegom iz drugoga umjetničkog faha jer nas
to ne obvezuje ni na što, a dobri smo prijatelji iz djetinjstva i
imamo povjerenja jedno u drugo. Nije to jedini razlog, družimo se, surađujemo, izmjenjujemo ideje, razumijemo se.
Iako trenutačno ne surađujemo na konkretnim projektima,
mi jesmo zajedno u nekim zonama. Neke kolege jako su mi
bliske i drage i volim s njima surađivati, ali ne tako da bismo
zajedno autorski stvarali. Ne mislim da sam posebnija od
bilo koga drugoga, ali bilo mi je teško grupirati se i to i dalje
jest. Trenutačno volim raditi s nekoliko ljudi i nadam se da
ću raditi s njima još dugo. Teško mi je odrediti što je to što
radim, mislim da je to vaš posao, vas koji analizirate i pišete
o tome. Ne vidim različitosti ili sličnosti među nama na sceni,
postoji sigurno nešto što nas povezuje, zato što svi zajedno
radimo u surovim uvjetima i to nas zbližava i označuje nas,
vidi se sigurno u svim našim radovima. Ta vrsta solidarnosti i
povezanosti jako je značajna. Osjećam se pripadnicom scene
utoliko što se osjećam solidarnom s kolegama, učim od njih,
pratim njihov rad, surađujem s nekima od njih, ali ne bih rekla
da pripadam u nekom estetičkom smislu, pa ni u ideološkome.
¬ Gledatelj i izvođač, misliš li da je izvođač/autor u nadređenoj poziciji, ili je možda obrnuto? Izvođač priprema
predstavu određeno vrijeme, gledatelj izvedbu vidi relativno
nepripremljen, makar se trudio pripremiti gledanjem prethodnih radova, čitanjem, upoznavanjem s plesnom situacijom itd., i to u većini slučajeva jednom.
Izvođačka odgovornost drukčija je vrsta odgovornosti
od odgovornosti publike. Izvođači, odnosno autori pripremaju teren, postavljaju pravila igre, imaju veću mogućnost
razgovor: Silvija Marchig manipulacije situacijom. Scena jest na neki način pozicija
moći. Slično kao u bilo kojem drugom međuljudskom odnosu, pogotovo ako su oprečni. Zanimljivo je pitanje dokle se
može dospjeti približavanjem tih dviju vrsta odgovornosti,
otvaranjem zone razmjene u kojoj se teži izjednačavanju
angažmana izvođača i publike. Kada sam bila jako mlada,
pitala sam se odakle mi pravo popeti se na scenu da bi me
drugi ljudi gledali, baš zato jer mi je to bilo tako prirodno i
super sam se osjećala. To nije danost, nego pitanje, tema,
tko su ljudi koji kažu: nas ćete sad gledati. Koju vrstu odgovornosti to sa sobom nosi?
¬ Može li umjetnik danas biti autonoman, da ni na koji
način ne podilazi financijerima, programerima, publici,
trendovima?
Promatram poziciju umjetnika ponajprije kao poziciju
velike odgovornosti koju umjetnik u prvom redu ima prema
sebi. Umjetnik na to ima pravo i to je nužnost, propitivati motive, zašto je važno raditi to što radiš, a radiš zapravo nešto
što je besmisleno. Ne vjerujem da je umjetnost tu da bi nam
oplemenila dušu ili da plešem jer inače ne bih mogla živjeti.
Mogla bih, ne zanosim se romantičarskim idejama. Razmišljajući dalje o pitanju za koga je moja umjetnost, smatram da
autonomnost umjetnika nije u suprotnosti imperativu da ne
smije postati autističnim. Svi radimo unutar sustava znakova,
umjetnost postaje zanimljivom kada netko uvriježeni sustav
znakova dovede u pitanje ili stvori vlastiti. Komunikativnost je
umjetničkog djela važna, ali ono ne mora podilaziti nikomu.
Također ne vjerujem da pravo umjetničko djelo komunicira
sa svakim Zemljaninom jer je djelo autentične ljudske prirode.
Meni umjetnost nekog amazonskog plemena jednako malo
znači kao što njima znači naša; možemo polje nerazumijevanja suziti, na ljude koji žive zajedno s nama u Zagrebu, u
istome kvartu. Sumnjam da većini mojih i tvojih susjeda išta
znači što se u suvremenome plesu dogodilo u posljednjih
dvadeset godina. Tu stvari postaju problematičnima jer se
umjetnost financira javnim novcem. Bez obzira na to, autonomija umjetnosti civilizacijska je tekovina, kao i javno
zdravstvo ili bilo što drugo što funkcionira na dobrobit svih.
Zato umjetnost ne smije biti podvrgnuta tržišnom sustavu ili
društvenim uvjetima, jednostavno ju se ne smije svesti pod
većinske kriterije. To bi značilo propast, vratilo bi nas na financiranje mecena, pa bi svi plesali kako bogataši smatraju
da bi trebalo. Aktualno pitanje je tko postavlja opće kriterije,
što je struka. Srećom, toliko smo mala zemlja da smo samo
dio europskoga konteksta, iako smo ga svjesni, i dalje posjedujemo pomalo anarhični prostor slobode. U svemu tome
nije jednostavno ostati vjeran svojoj autentičnoj motivaciji,
možda je to i iluzija. Bilo kako bilo, u to vjerujem, važno mi
je baviti se stvarima koje su meni bitne, nije vrijeme za bavljenje trivijalnostima. Možda je prije bilo više prostora za to,
no uvjeti se radikaliziraju.
Ivana Slunjski nezavisna je kritičarka i istraživačica izvedbenih
umjetnosti. Piše i uređuje u raznim tiskanim i elektroničkim
medijima, povremeno objavljuje na Trećem programu Hrvatskoga radija te u drugim zbornicima i knjigama. Trenutačno
se zaokuplja recentnim inovativnim izvedbenim praksama,
strategijama otpora ekonomskom obesnaživanju umjetničkoga rada i razvojem novih modela umjetničke razmjene.
Zalaže se za profesionalizaciju pisanja o plesu. Diplomirala
je komparativnu književnost i kroatistiku na Filozofskom fakultetu u Zagrebu.
Movements 23 | 24 _ 121
performance: As Long as We're
Together
performance: As Long as We're Together < As Long as We're Together, Photo: Nina Đurđević >
IVANA SLUNJSKI
In Search of
the Other:
The Solo That
Refuses to Be
One
On the performance As Long as We’re Together
(Dokle god smo zajedno) by Silvia Marchig
T
hroughout her performative work, Silvia Marchig
has persistently cultivated diverse forms of collaborative relationships, authorial intercessions
and negotiations, practicing tolerance and embracing the
challenge of difference, confrontation, but also learning,
as she views performance as an act of sharing with others, with her co-extants on stage and in the auditorium,
the participants of a process of theatric exchange. The
author’s emphasis on the importance of the occurrences
in the space in between somewhat clarifies her hesitation
to engage in mono-forms – over the course of her, now
already lengthy, performing career, solos kept slipping
away from her; or maybe she kept skillfully slipping away
from them: “My latest solos include a direct relationship with the audience; I am not completely alone in
these solos. I don’t know, I guess I don’t know how to
work alone. I have never created something completely
on my own.”1 And indeed, the two solos sharing the
title As Long as We’re Together, or, more accurately, her
work based on the subject of personal archaeology,
developed in different phases and contexts, from which
two functionally independent, but connected through
shared motifs, solos arise, can only nominally be considered solos: as part of the 15 Years of Trafik (15 godina
Trafika)2 project, it is a fifteen-minute disclosure of an
isolated stage micro-world on one of the six stages of a
choreographed walkthrough, as if through a museum
1
This is No Time for Trivialities, interview with Silvia Marchig by
the author, in this edition of Movements, page 136.
2
The project premiered on July 23rd, 2013, in the facilities of the
former motor equipment factory and foundry Rikard Benčić. Authors
and perfomers: Marin Alvir, Lara Badurina, Dijana Bolanča, Edvin Liverić, Magdalena Lupi Alvir, Silvia Marchig, Josip Maršić, Andrej Mirčev,
Nikola Orešković, Iva Nerina Sibila, Gordana Svetopetrić i Žak Valenta.
Movements 23 | 24 _ 123
performance: As Long as We're Together
exhibition, and one of four performative answers to the
question of painful spots which were affirmed at the
“small performative conference” as part of the Four-handedness (Četverorukost)3 project. That meta-theatrical and/or
meta-theoretical event places the spectator into a position
of agency twice: first as a co-performer whose reactions
(not just gestures and miming, but verbalized responses as well) are caught in a mirror by the performer (a
recurring motif in both solos), and then as a participant
in a discussion about the performative answers. But it
is precisely the things which we persistently try to push
away that speak out about us even more significantly
than the things we persist in doing. Phrased in such a
way, this Silvia Marchig’s quote associatively recalls an
often-interpreted explication by one of the founders of
the modern dance solo, Isadora Duncan: „When I have
danced I have tried always to be the Chorus: I have been
the Chorus of young girls hailing the return of the fleet, I
have been the Chorus dancing the Pyrrhic Dance or the
Bacchic; I have never once danced a solo.”4 How should
we understand the performative strategy of the liberator
of dance, who renounced the rigidity of ballet discipline
and the subordination to other people’s visions of dance,
dancing her own art and her own body, while seeking
authentic motion through which she could externalize
an individual experience of the world? By referring to
the chorus, Isadora Duncan was not talking only about
a collective body, Ann Daly, the author of an extensive
study of her work, claims; she was also referring: „to the
interaction, or ‘duet,’ so to speak, of her body on/by/
3
Four-handedness (Četverorukost) is a yearlong project by Četveroruka, an artistic organization led by director Marina Petković Liker
and dance artist Sonja Pregrad, which explores female performative
practices. A small performative conference on the subject of “painful spots in an intimate, social and political context” took place on
November 9 th, 2014 in the basement of a building in Ožegovićeva
Street in Zagreb. Four artists offered their performative answers:
director and theatric artist Helena Petković with Intersections
(Sjecišta), visual artist Sabina Mikelić with A Small Bundle of Roots
Tied Together (Mula skupina korijenja svezanih zajedno), musician Kaja
Farszky with The Noise of Silence or Silence of Noise? (Buka tišine ili
tišina buke?) and dance artist Silvia Marchig with As Long as We’re
Together. In addition to them, twenty-odd spectators/collocutors
(other artists, critics, theorists, students and other interested visitors) participated in the conference. The conference was reprised on
February 7th, 2015 at the Academy of Dramatic Art in Zagreb.
4
From her essay “The Dance of the Greeks,” in Isadora Duncan:
The Art of the Dance, ed. Sheldon Cheney. Quoted from Isadora
Duncan, “Excerpts from Her Writings,” The Vision of Modern Dance:
In the Words of Its Creators, ed. Jean M. Brown, Naomi Mindlin and
Charles Humphrey Woodford, Princeton Book Company, Hightstown, 1998, p. 9.
124 _ Kretanja 23 | 24
with its surrounding space”.5 In view of the emancipatory
potential of the female solo, any attempt to simultaneously embody an individual and a collective body resists
traditional binary divisions, so Duncan does not merely
express inner impulses; it is a “more complex semiotics
of representation”.6 And she herself locates the Greek
Chorus, the “mother to all drama”, as the “origin for an
art form struggling for its legitimacy”.7
The modern dance solo, as a prototypical female performance form, which was developed within dance art
during the 20th century as an act of shaping an auto-poetical discourse and constructing a performative subject,
that purest form of expression still carries the burden
of authorial legitimacy. Simultaneously with the rise of
this exemplary form of building a stage identity, a dissemination of the subject has been occurring; according
to certain interpretations8 , this has been going on since
its very inception, because it is based on individualism
interwoven with capitalist modes of production, and
nowadays a solo, as a relatively cheap product, is the
most convenient way of trading in art and manipulating
artistic demands in the name of authenticity. Taking into
consideration the necessary reproduction of existing relationships of production in the upkeep of such a system,
the construction of performative subjects is also subject
to ideologically intertwined education programs, and the
methods and shaping procedures do not remain exclusively within the self-referential field of the performing arts.
The performative conference Four-handedness, as a
counterpart to a lecture-performance, which has over the
past decade been ubiquitous in performing practice, and
the significantly different contexts of the performances,
a private basement and an Academy, bridge the different ways of acquiring and transferring the two kinds of
knowledge: knowledge about practicing, and knowledge
gained from practicing. In this case, it is not a true hybrid
form, because it adheres to a roughly conference-style
way of presentation, but the performative answers manage to maintain the integrity of stage creation, which does
not adopt the principles of lecturing; that is, only a few of
the answers contain traces of them (for example, Helena
Petković’s performance, which will not be the topic of
this text). The topic of painful spots, in the context of a
performance format, entails creation or exposure of per5
Done into Dance: Isadora Duncan in America, Wesleyan University Press, Middletown, 2002, p. 6.
6
Daly, p. 20.
7
Daly, p. 148.
8
Comp. Bojana Cvejić and Ana Vujanović, Public Sphere by Performance, b_books, Les laboratoires d’ Aubervilliers and ThH, Berlin
– Paris – Belgrade, 2012, p. 145–146.
performance: As Long as We're Together sonal experiences, so to a greater or lesser degree these
performative answers contain elements of the theatre of
the real. Painful spots – just like spaces marked as liminal
because the schism caused by trauma means that they
cannot be completely comprehended through experience
and, thus, cannot be articulated through language – in
spite of this inability to be formulated, demand to be
transformed into something meaningful, in order for
us to understand it, thereby making a demand that is in
fact analogous to the psychoanalytic term of repetition
compulsion. The element of repetition and the need to
translate this experientially incomprehensible or only
partially comprehensible authentic spot into something
meaningful mean that the performing model used here is
a representational one, but by injecting the real into the
performing situation, the theatre of the real moves away
from mimetism. Pain, painful spots, and trauma, within
a stage framework, rely on empathy as the fundamental
element of socialization; sharing a situation is affirmed
as something healing, and the audience members are
engaged as witnesses to a process of reintegration, which
will transpose a real experience of sharing outside the
theatre, potentially spurring social change9 . The role of
the spectators/participants in Four-handedness lies along
these lines.
With a starting point in dance, but building an almost
dramatic situation, Silvia Marchig’s performance As Long
as We’re Together, in the process of constituting the stage
subject, blurs the first- and third-person perspectives from
which the material is presented, shaping a sort of shifting
entity. As she says in the booklet, the work is focused
on a “personal archeology of abandoned spaces and lost
relationships”, whether this refers to people personally
close to her or her relationship towards the lives and
actions of public figures which are inspirational or close
to her in a certain aspect. In the first part of the piece we
see the performer through a doorway, moving through
the space where moments earlier the previous performative answer was performed, trying to read the material clues in order to intuit the movements or contours
of other bodies, establishing relations to objects and
to places assumed to be marked by someone’s presence
in that space. Then, sharing the space with the audience,
she sits down with her back turned to the audience, and
speaks a sentence which could be attributed to her, but
also to someone else. Keeping the coherence of meaning
of her first statement, but shifting between the first person and the third-person storytelling mode, and finally
even playing a tape of Peter Orr’s conversation with
Sylvia Plath, Silvia Marchig gives voice to the poet so
she can speak through her. She then takes a mirror and,
searching for a collocutor through her refection, wonders
whether we have the right to speak directly about personal traumas, illnesses, deaths? As she embodies an external
voice, she splits her own self (on the performative level,
of course), into a voice that unfurls in one direction and
a silent reflection seeking confirmation from the spectator/witness. In this way, the performing entity truly
is participative and polyphonic. Because, in a situation
of theatric reality, but also a real exchange on the stage,
how can we tell whether the voice or the reflection in
the mirror is telling the truth, whose lives should be
remembered, should we speak about the ordinary death
of an ordinary man or the bizarre death of a great poet;
whose pain is greater, the authors pain caused by the
death of her father, or Syliva Plath’s pain, caused by
life? After receiving confirmation from the spectators,
the performer gets up, explores the space around her
(licking the wall, feeling the chill on her back, lying on
the floor), then herself (running her fingers across her
body, filling her mouth with air), and then dances. Out of
the polyphony, a singular performative entity dissociates
itself. Oscillating between duality and a fluid identity; listening to what’s within while being in tune with others;
defining without categorizing; recognizing inscriptions,
and a forever elusive authenticity are constants which
the solo has always negotiated, from its first rudimentary
forms to the present. Examining the continuity of form,
we can conclude that Silvia Marchig, as well as her distant
sister in dance, still dances the solo (as well).
9
This is more noticeable with forms of the documentary theatre
and verbatim theatre which are used in therapy.
Movements 23 | 24 _ 125
interview: Silvia Marchig
interview: Silvia Marchig < As Long as We're Together, Photo: Nina Đurđević >
IVANA SLUNJSKI
This is No Time
for Trivialities
An interview with
Silvia Marchig
W
hat is your first memory of dance?
I remember myself dancing. I dance,
elated, finding a lot of joy in the music and
movement, but also in the fact that I am being watched.
I have always been fascinated by the performative nature
of this situation, a term which I am able to use today;
because it wasn’t just about a childish need to be the
center of attention. I danced alone as well, for myself,
but my excitement would immeasurably grow whenever
someone watched me or when I danced for an audience.
For a real one, on stage at the Pioneer Theatre, or at least
for my mom and neighbor.
¬ What else inspired you to start dancing? When
did you get your first dancing experiences?
As early as pre-school, when I was five, I think, my
mother enrolled me in the Pioneer Theatre at Sušak
(today’s Croatian Cultural Dome). I spent my entire
childhood there. At the Pioneer Theatre, children, under
the guidance of expert teachers, created plays for other
children. Joža Komljenović, a former soloist and director
of ballet at the Croatian National Theatre (HNK) of Ivan
pl. Zajc in Rijeka, or Grandpa Joža, as we called him, was
in charge of the ballet group. Together with our dear
Grandpa Joža, we created a series of children’s ballets,
The Cricket and the Ants (Cvrčak i mravi), Puss in Boots
(Mačak u čizmama), Hansel and Gretel (Ivica i Marica), The
Nutcracker (Ščelkunčik)... These were very professional
productions, from our approach to rehearsals and the
choreography, down to the costumes, set and lighting
design. In my first encounter with dance, I was already
on the stage. I was never a hobbyist, this was very serious
for me from the very beginning. A lot of credit for that
goes to Grandpa Joža, his love of ballet and the scene,
with which he infected all of us.
¬ Was ballet your first choice, or were there no other forms of artistic dance available to children and
youth in Rijeka at the time?
Ballet was and always will be a great love of mine. I
consider it to be a noble discipline. I love the mental state
it demands from the dancers, and I find it similar to the
concentration required for Eastern martial arts. Of course,
if it is taught and practiced properly. There is a dark,
violent variant of it, and it is, sadly, more widespread.
A good ballet teacher should have the mental and physical knowledge of a true master. I probably would have
become a classical ballerina had I been physically good
enough, and had I not constantly questioned everything,
which makes the form untenable. In Rijeka, there was
no contemporary dance that I know of until the 1990s.
There was ballet at the Croatian National Theatre and that
was it. When Senka Baruška founded the Labis group in
the late 1990s, it was the first professional attempt at
Movements 23 | 24 _ 127
dancing anything other than ballet. Once again, as far
as I am aware. I should think that plenty of interesting
things happened in Rijeka during the avant-garde 1920s,
but nothing that would have any influence in the following decades.
¬ What was your education at the ballet studio of
the Croatian National Theatre like? Are there any
teachers you would particularly like to mention,
and why?
Up until recently, there was no ballet school in Rijeka.
Joža Komljenović, through his huge enthusiasm and energy, taught a bunch of children and staged plays with us as
part of the already mentioned Pioneer Theatre. There was
a question of education in the classical sense, one that
would attract performers to the National Theatre’s ballet
ensemble. He somehow assumed he would take it all on
himself, and our group became the basis for the first class
of the study of ballet. We started working with more
structure, and alongside our work on choreographies,
we had real classes every day. Grandpa Joža was later
joined by prima-ballerina Katarina Kocka, who came to
Rijeka from the, by that time, already war-struck Sarajevo,
and worked as a ballet teacher with the ensemble; after
her came Oxana Brandiboura and other ballerinas from
the ensemble; by that time I was no longer in Rijeka,
so I don’t know exactly who. Anyway, we were closely
linked to the work of the Theatre’s ensemble. In later
years, a few of us were allowed to attend the morning
classes of the professionals, which was just phenomenal
for me. We were soon accepted into the ensemble, to
fill out the back ranks – it was wartime, and the ballet
troupe in Rijeka was on the verge of collapse, since it was
predominantly composed of dancers from Serbia, Russia,
Romania. Only the craziest and the bravest chose to stay.
Or those that didn’t have anywhere to go; the situation
at home wasn’t any better. Paradoxically, the chaos and
horrors of war and transition in the 1990s provided us
with the opportunity to step out into the big-time, in
real ballets. I remember explaining to a high-school friend
of mine that it was so important, and at the same time
so bizarre, that in those days of utter horror, fear and
aggression, something as ephemeral and pure as classical
ballet be preserved. I was aware of the shifted reality in
which I was living, for example, arguing with my mom,
while the air-raid sirens were blaring in a darkened city,
to let me go to the rehearsal at the theatre, where we
would get on-stage in between alarms to practice the
royal garden scene from The Firebird, and play catch with
golden apples. I found it brilliant. The triumph of art over
the banality of evil.
128 _ Kretanja 23 | 24
¬ Could you compare the ballet studio of the Croatian
National Theatre (HNK) of Ivan pl. Zajc with other studios
or schools at the time in Croatia, or perhaps Yugoslavia,
with regards to their work styles and methods? Do you have
any impression of that?
As a high-school student, I met the students from
Zagreb and Belgrade at the seminars I attended, in Budapest and Primošten, for example. The differences were
huge, because of the specific circumstances I have already
described in which our ballet studio operated. They were
technically much better, more pure, but, on the other
hand, they were students. I viewed myself as a professional. Considering the stage experience I already had, I
actually was one already.
¬ What did you see in theatre that left a mark on
you? What did you read? Did you try your hand at
any other art forms?
I suppose that every period creates its own specific
breaches for hyper-sensitive and creative youth. I moved
in a circle of peers who, just like me, considered art to
be the only thing worth pursuing and taking seriously
– beside our everyday decadence. Of course, we went
to concerts, we read the existentialists, we went to the
theatre regularly. Tomaž Pandur was very popular in Rijeka at the time, for example. Livio Badurina in Pandur’s
Carmen: he comes to mind as someone who impressed
me a lot when I was fifteen or sixteen. But no, I did not
have the need to act or write. Dancing was more than
enough for me, it was all-encompassing.
And then Žak Valenta and Senka Baruška came back
to Rijeka from England. She brought a bunch of contemporary dance videos, and we ate those up. DV8, Pina
Bausch, Joëlle Bouvier and Régis Obadia – when I saw
them on video for the first time, I was stunned by how
powerful and suggestive the human body in motion
can be. Senka Baruška founded the Labis group somewhere around 1990, and that was my first encounter
with contemporary dance. We practiced together and
worked on choreographies together. Labis was extremely progressive, it was not based on earlier practices
but looked for something completely new. We staged
some very interesting shows then, and many shorter
choreographies. In 1991, our performance Awakening
(Buđenje) was performed at the Dance Week Festival in
Zagreb, and at the Novi Sad Ballet competition, in the
choreography category. This was just before the war
broke out. We also had a real mini-tour of the Netherlands by van, where we were the first Yugoslavian
group to enter the official selection of the prestigious
Groningen festival in 1992. Then Senka Baruška went
interview: Silvia Marchig to Amsterdam to the SNDO1 , having, in the meantime,
convinced most of us younger dancers that we need
to continue our education abroad. Many contemporary Croatian performing artists passed through the
Labis, in an amazing performing scope, from globally
renowned ballet dancer Ronald Savković to prominent
Croatian actors like Dražen Šivak, Edvin Liverić and
Nina Violić. Labis was a phenomenon of sorts, stylistically so diverse, and its inspirations ranged from dance
theatre to Merce Cunningham. And all of that was done
completely outside of institutions, purely as a result of
the personal initiative and enthusiasm of all of us, but
especially Senka Baruška and Žak Valenta.
Another big world
hy did you, after studying ballet at the
HNK in Rijeka, choose Dresden’s Palucca
Schule? Did anyone advise you, direct you?
How clear was your vision of yourself as a dancer
at the time?
We are talking about the early 1990s, a time before
the Internet. The information available at the time was
disseminated orally, perhaps in the form of a flyer for a
school or an article in a foreign magazine, brought here
from abroad by someone. It was either that, or physically travel to the place in question, and there were no
cheap flights. I knew I wanted to become an outstanding
dancer, and I didn’t have a clear vision of what that was
supposed to mean. Senka Baruška advised me to enroll in
the Amsterdam Academy’s contemporary dance program.
But that school was well beyond my means, financially.
A German colleague of mine suggested I go to Germany,
where state schools are free. She described the Palucca
Schule as a school that insisted on classical techniques,
but also on improvisation as well. That seemed like a
good combination to me. I had their address, I wrote to
them, and they informed me of the date of the audition.
I bought a train ticket and left. From today’s perspective
of hyper-information, it sounds completely crazy. It was
as if someone bound your eyes and set you loose into
the world.
W
¬ You never considered a career in ballet? What do
you mean when you say you were not “physically
good enough”?
During my education, I did not focus on technique
alone; at the ballet studio, we spent part of our time on
stage, and part of our time in the studio, which demands
1
The School for New Dance Development (School voor Nieuwe
Dansontwikkeling).
a different type of preparation and concentration. When
I was a child, I did not go through the sort of drill that
is necessary for achieving a pure form and technique at
that age. Had I stayed in Rijeka, I probably would have
stayed in the ballet ensemble. In fact, Senka Baruška had
the biggest influence on me, insisting that I needed to
get away from Rijeka and learn some new things. At the
time, it seemed to me that everything that was outside
Rijeka, outside Yugoslavia, was brilliant, because there
was a big world out there. The director of ballet in Rijeka at the time, Peter Pustišek, told me: “How long will
this education take, you’ll be twenty-one by the time
you’re done, you will be old.” He wanted me to stay at
the ensemble. In the world of ballet, you are ready for
the stage at the age of eighteen, maybe even earlier. I
have always had a sort of identity crisis as a ballerina; I
still feel like a fraud when I’m surrounded by my ballet
teacher friends, even though I was in a sense a more real
ballerina than they were, since I did dance in classical
ballets and most of them haven’t. For example, I danced
as one of the Willis in the second act of Giselle when I
was that age. I respect the ballet technique and I try to
understand it deeply. I have gone through everything
from trying my best to master and perfect the form to
negating it completely; as soon as I graduated from the
academy, I cut my hair short and didn’t want to hear of
classical ballet, except for teaching classes, because that
was profitable. Fifteen years later, when I was preparing
for my professional ballet exam, so I could teach ballet
in schools, I got familiar with it again. Ballet carries this
need to twist and discipline the body, which is invasive,
but is actually about sophisticating something that is
natural; it is not a de-naturalizing process. Today, in my
performance work, references and elements from my
ballet past do crop up, probably more often than I realize.
Ballet has written itself into my body after all.
¬ Adapting to a new environment, a new language,
a different mentality, a different regime; what did
it look like, did you have any doubts, what pushed
you forward?
It was very difficult, actually. Dresden, as a former
German Democratic Republic city, was undergoing
transition at the time. People were, generally speaking,
very distrustful of foreigners. Almost nobody spoke
English, not even at the school. The school itself was
going through an identity crisis of sorts, on the one hand
rigidly adhering to the German Ausdruckstanz tradition
and the legacy of Gret Palucca, while on the other hand
there were some teachers there who were aware that
some changes to the program needed to be made. A
Movements 23 | 24 _ 129
core of old teachers wanted to keep the school within
a traditional framework; none of them had ever been
anywhere outside the Eastern Bloc. They had had contact
with Russia, they knew what classical ballet was and
they knew about the Ausdrucktanz; they were very, very
closed-off. The students were mostly locals, young people
who had already completed the first six introductory
grades of Palucca. Nobody really understood what I was
doing there. They only knew that I was from a country where a war was raging at the time and which had
been socialist, just like theirs. But no, I did not have any
doubts. I simply could not go back. I had to prove to
everyone – my parents, who were worried; the director
of ballet in Rijeka who had dissuaded me from pursuing
further education – that I was at the right place. And that
everything would be great.
¬ What was the program of the school like?
Classical ballet every day, as the basic technique,
accompanied by modern dance techniques: Limon,
Graham, improvisation classes inspired by the work
of Gret Palucca. In advanced semesters we also learned
composition, or choreography. Plus all the basic theoretical courses, all in German, which I didn’t speak in
the beginning. Every summer, they organized seminars:
in the summer of 1994, the Dutch choreographer and
teacher Benno Voorham came there to hold a class in
contact improvisation. Those fourteen days were like a
drop of fresh water after a long, long walk through the
desert. And during that difficult period I didn’t want to
admit to myself or anyone else that I was lost in a desert
all that time. I still consider Ausdrucktanz to be powerful
and interesting, I love the German avant-garde, Valeska
Gert, Mary Wigman, Gret Palucca. But during my stay in
Dresden I had the feeling that we approached nothing
directly and concretely, but that everything was somewhere around me, and I was expected to comprehend it
and master it. That was a crucial year, in which the school
was seeking a new identity and the quality of lectures
took a hit; that was partially the reason why I left.
¬ Why did you choose to go to the Mannheim Academy? What are the similarities and differences between
these two Academies?
After my freshman year, I decided to change my environment. I simply realized that I would wilt if I stayed
in an atmosphere in which the whole city still reeks of
the worst aspects of the past, where you cannot speak
English in a tram without attracting strange looks, where
everything is covered in a layer of black coal at minus 25
degrees in wintertime and, most importantly, where the
130 _ Kretanja 23 | 24
school is in such a crisis that it doesn’t know where to
go next. On later auditions I ran into former colleagues
from Palucca and found out that the circumstances soon
changed for the better, both in the city and in the school
itself. But I had left before these changes happened. I
came to Mannheim accidentally as well: a friend from
Dresden was also on the way to an audition by car, and I
was completely broke, so it meant a lot to me that I could
get there cheaply. So, I went with her and passed my
audition. The school, unlike the one in Dresden, seemed
dynamic, lively and effective. I liked the teachers and
the students, and they liked me. The Mannheim Dance
Academy, as part of the Mannheim University of Music
and Performing Arts (Staatliche Hochschule für Musik und
Darstellende Kunst Heidelberg-Mannheim), has a music
and a dance department, and the program of the dance
department is intended for educating a typical dancer in a
city theatre classical ballet, contemporary techniques, a lot
of repertory, both classical and character, and a little bit
of theory. It also offered the possibility of simultaneously
learning dance pedagogy, which was also important for
my decision, because everyday hardships of life had, in
the meantime, convinced me that it would be useful to
have a profession that could provide me with income.
The reasons behind my decision were really trivial. That,
of course, brings its own consequences with it. All said, I
have few good memories from my time at the Mannheim
Academy.
The two faces of everyday life – the heartlessness of
the system, the gentleness of the support
hat are the moments, situations, people,
who were important to you during your
education, or formation as a dancer, and
later author; that had an important influence on you
or were a turning point in your idea of dance, creation, performing, art in general?
After the aforementioned Joža Komljenović and Senka
Baruška who had an exceptional influence on me in my
earliest days, I had difficulty finding common ground
with my teachers, as I was pretty unwilling to adapt and
was always railing against the system. In Mannheim I had
the opportunity to work with Joseph Willems, a former
dancer for William Forsythe and the Netherlands Dance
Theatre, who helped me regain my dancing self-confidence in the studio. Then, during my final year at the
academy, choreographer Richard Wherlock arrived as a
guest. He was staging his choreography Transit Dances,
with us students. I got a solo part at the audition, to
the surprise of many teachers, who even warned him
of my obstinacy and potential inability to attend certain
W
interview: Silvia Marchig rehearsals, since I worked throughout my studies in
order to earn a living. His trust meant a lot for me and
our collaboration was wonderful. In the end, that role
salvaged my degree and helped improve my status of a
rebel. Over the course of my studies, I also participated in
many summer workshops, and I would like to highlight
my collaboration with Felix Ruckert on the Ring project
during the Tanzwerkstatt Europa festival in Munich.
That experience inspired me to further contemplate
the performative nature of immediate contact with the
audience. During my entire education, I never dared to
think of myself as an author. My maturing in that regard
took a lot longer, due to the huge responsibility which
I attributed to the role of an author as someone who
had an all-encompassing perspective on a performance.
I first had to realize what a performance or performing
situation meant to me, and why dance was my medium.
At least, I needed to open up these issues, because I still
haven’t resolved them today. But to establish an approach
which does not accept anything others accept as a given,
but challenges those absolutes, takes time and maturity.
¬ After the Academy, you tried to establish a foothold on the German dance scene. How do you remember that period?
That was a bitter experience. It is difficult to set your
priorities straight in life when one is completely broke
and alone. You first need to settle your basic existence,
which means that artistic preoccupations take a back
seat. When I graduated from the academy, I looked for
a job and visited hundreds of city theatres; I auditioned
once or twice each weekend. First and foremost, looking
for a job which would provide me with the necessary
paperwork, one in a theatre and not in an independent
troupe, because a citizen of a non-EU country, which I
was at the time, could not get a work permit for working
in an independent troupe. I looked almost everywhere
and just couldn’t get hired. When you walk around so
desperately, no-one will have you. The competition is
incredible: hordes and hordes of people wandered around
Germany looking for a job, from all over Europe, Latin
America, Asia, all around the world.
Having a job as a dancer in Germany in the late 1990s
was a prestigious existence; you can’t live better as a dancer anywhere outside of Germany. German state theatres
mostly hire dancers with a classical background, who
then dance in whatever way the hired choreographer asks
of them – for example, Stephan Thoss or Gregor Zöllig,
who often stage performances based on the legacy of
dance theatre. To this very day, the state theatres there
function in this way. The other, progressive things in
Germany are taking place on the independent scene. And
so, I travelled around Germany, teaching classes in private
ballet schools and working as a waitress at the same
time. Eventually I was accepted into the Desperate Figures Dance Theater in Mainz, which was an independent
troupe, but they managed to procure a contract of sorts
for me, through the Mainzer Kammerspiele theatre. Then
I got a job in Frankfurt, in the opera Conquering Mexico,
based on the work of Antonin Artaud, where I was more
of an extra than a dancer, but I accepted, only because I
got health insurance, which I had previously ended up
without. And then I got hurt really bad during rehearsal,
ending up in hospital with massive injuries. I could no
longer audition, I could not work, I lost my work permit,
I lost everything. I couldn’t walk for six months. And
this tempo of life culminated in the realization that I
couldn’t live like that anymore. It was as if I had needed
something to hit me in the head and make me stop. It was
then that I returned to Croatia. I thought about Germany
for a while, I worked on a small performance with Eva
Koch in Nuremberg, with a steel rod still in my leg, but
then Iva Nerina Sibila, whom I’d known from the Trafik,
started rehearsing for a performance with ten dancers and
started looking for – dancers. The project eventually fell
through, and I stayed in Zagreb.
¬ And then you stumbled into the Ekscena?
Yes, I got into the Ekscena. I came to Zagreb without
a plan, I really hadn’t intended to stay for fifteen years.
¬ What is your opinion now of the open model of
organization, where everyone decides how and to
what extent they will work on organizing programs,
projects, and managing the organization; how do
you feel about horizontal decision-making and the
delegation of responsibility? It has been almost nine
years since the Call for a Takeover initiative, and the
self-dissolution of the coordination team, and you
left the Ekscena2 even before all that.
2
In late 2001, several dance artists founded the Experimental
Free Scene (Eksperimentalna slobodna scena or shorter Ekscena) as
a free platform which would support the development of all existing
initiatives on the scene, providing performing artists with the necessary prerequisites for working and sharing information, and insisting
on a non-hierarchic model, a horizontal delegation of responsibilities
and equality in the process of decision-making in the programmatic
planning and directing the organization. Over five years, the platform
grew into a systematic self-organizing, educational, informative and
performative space. While widening the scope of activities and multiplying the program and project levels, the model started to become
strained, and in 2006 the coordinating team published a Call for a
Takeover (Poziv na preuzimanje), leaving the coordination to fresh
Movements 23 | 24 _ 131
That sort of an organizational model was, and still
is, progressive and very fruitful. By working within the
Ekscena framework I learned about responsibility and
independence. I also started thinking more intensively
about the wider social context in which dance art takes
place, and understanding the aesthetics that comes out of
self-organizing collaborations which negate conservative
hierarchies in these processes. Working together with
my Ekscena colleagues, I learned a lot, and opened up
all the important issues which I still deal with today. I
wouldn’t say I left the Ekscena; I stopped working in the
coordinating team, after four years I became exhausted
and turned to artistic work. Motherhood, as well, came at
that time. The members of the coordinating team at the
time, Selma Banich, Sandra Banić, Zrinka Užbinec, Maja
Marjančić, Željka Sančanin, they are all still close friends
and colleagues of mine, and their support is extremely
important for me.
¬ Did the Ekscena and the environment it created,
through organizing daily trainings and workshops,
ensuring spaces for working and performing, and
by linking you with other artists and organizations,
encourage you to try your hand at artistic creation?
Your first authorial projects were created at the
time…
Absolutely, the intensive work and socializing at the
Ekscena were a real encouragement for authorial work.
A space for exploring and performing my first works was
made available, for example, in Ekscena’s WARP project.
Many collaborations and important conversations took
place at the Ekscena; together, we shifted the boundaries
of the existing dance tradition in Zagreb, both structurally
and aesthetically. We certainly share many characteristics
which make us members of the so-called Zagreb scene,
even though we, as authors, developed autonomously,
and this respect of autonomy has remained one of the
priorities in our community.
Creating from a place of pain
rom your first authorial works, Autos (2003),
Cardio-adapter (Kardioadapter, 2004), Left
Thigh (Lijevo bedro, 2005), to more recent ones
such as This Is (Not) My Forest (Ovo /ni/je moja šuma,
F
forces who would have a clearer vision of how to further develop or
restructure the existing model in line with the current needs of the
scene. After the Call for a Takeover, the Ekscena turned increasingly
towards production activities, and in 2013 a new coordinating team
was formed. Following the guidelines of the organization, it has become active, albeit in a somewhat subdued manner, in revitalizing
certain segments of the program.
132 _ Kretanja 23 | 24
2010), which was created in collaboration with Darko
Japelj and Nataša Govedić, or your latest solo project
As Long as We’re Together (Dokle god smo zajedno,
2014), trauma and pain surface as your permanent
preoccupations.
I view pain as the most intense sensation and trauma
as the most intense motivation for creating. I do not wish
to deal with it in a therapeutic way, I try to avoid having
an autobiographical approach or using my own traumas
and pain, without considering the framework, the context, the way these are presented. If pain is the source,
the work will consist of a search for understanding this
place of pain and trauma and their intensity, from which
something just as intense can be created; something close
to that intensity, always in the interspace of communication with the audience and my partners on stage.
¬ At the Postproduction Coaching organized by Željka Sančanin and Martina Granić in March this year,
you mentioned taking on other people’s pain as a
connection between you and Sylvia Plath. Sharing
the pain, atoning for someone else…
The process of identification, sharing, empathy – all
these terms stand for processes I find important in a performance. I see identifying with an artist to be a powerful
process, although I do not see it as something binary; it is
a complex phenomenon. With Sylvia Plath, specifically,
it is a game of assuming an identity. During my performances, when I play the tape of a conversation with her,
when she is asked, “Sylvia, what made you write your
first poems,” I enjoy the possibility of switching identities
that this situation opens up, at the most banal level. This
opens a door into a performance which stems from my
own pain, which becomes both mine and hers and the
pain of whoever is watching; it is no longer private, but
is happening, for the duration of the performance, in
real time, between us. Of course, Sylvia Plath is a part of
the performance for much more complex reasons than
the fact we share our first name, but that first level of
identification opens up possibilities for performative
twists. In my earlier work, I kept coming back to specific
events from my past, thematizing them, using them in
the titles of my performances and the like, which was an
inarticulate attempt to engage in direct communication
through a dance performance. I never had the need to
share my own biographical information. During the open
rehearsal in the Museum of Contemporary Art that you
mentioned, when I spoke about a friend who got fired
because he was too old to fit into the youthful image of
his ensemble, or about the choreograph I had worked
with who died from a brain tumor, it wasn’t my intention
interview: Silvia Marchig to tell a personal story or to share biographical data. I
am interested in creating something new and alive from
a place of pain. It is a sort of redemption, if you will.
¬ How much more vulnerable are you as a performer
when you create from a place of pain?
I am definitely more vulnerable, but I find it interesting, exciting. But there is also an ethical side to it;
how does one open up such topics in the first place,
how do you open up a subject that has to do with the
performer himself, and what kind of an effort does that
require from the person watching you expose yourself. If
we are talking about exposure, the audience is also very
much exposed when personal facts are being shared on
the stage. When I talk about the death of my father, for
example, it is a matter of ethics, not just for me, because I
find it hard to talk about, but also from the perspective on
watching and listening to such a personal account. I find
it interesting, this process of seeking a way to perform
it, recount it, reveal it as the source of what I am doing.
The process of bringing this intimate and painful place
to someone else, someone unknown.
¬ Every wound and trauma is unique and not completely expressible, but every one of us has a painful
spot, every one of us is wounded and weak somewhere; it is because of this that we can understand
something so intimate as something shared and
common.
Yes, but in order to transfer strong emotions you
need to create a space of mutual trust or engaged watching. Then it is no longer important whether what you
are viewing is fiction or a documentary account. When
performance artists such as Marina Abramović or Siniša
Labrović whip themselves, for example, they take the
audience into a liminal zone, blurring the line between a
performance and a situation in which the audience shares
responsibility for what is going on, because of a very real
danger to the health of the performer. In a similar way,
when I talk about a personal trauma of mine, which may
or may not be true, but I talk about it as if it were real,
we enter a liminal zone between documentarism and
performance. I think these two liminal zones of reality
are the most powerful areas of transmission. In my work
with Via Negativa3 we often treaded that line. For me,
3
Via Negativa is a platform for research, development and production of contemporary performing arts started in 2002 under the
working methods by its founder and artistic director Bojan Jablanovec.
Based in Ljubljana, and bringing together international collaborators
with each new project as a group of individuals connected by common
interests in researching performing arts and performing strategies.
watching and performing is equally powerful, because it
is engaging, but it also poses a political question about
what kind of community we should first establish in
order for these things to surface, in order for us to share
or intimacies.
¬ As a performer, how do you deal with the aging
of the body?
It is definitely an issue. It is intriguing in one way
when you are thirty, in another way when you are forty,
and in a third way, I assume, when you are fifty. Physical
decline is cruel and unavoidable. Of course, aging brings
a wealth of a different kind, experience accumulates. I
am horrified when I think about, in my present state
of mind, what my body will be like in twenty years.
But with a different state of mind, you deal with it in
another way; that is a consolation. But I cannot say that
I am immune; for example, when my knee starts hurting
after two rehearsals because of something I wouldn’t
even have felt ten years ago. Fragility and vulnerability
are interesting subjects for me, but on the other hand
they are so limiting. I had an injury when I was young
and it helped me deal with the fragility of my body, it
gave me a different sort of strength.
The fact that I am one of the oldest dancers on our
scene, and have been for a while, is another matter
entirely. There are almost no active dancers over forty
in Croatia, and I assume it is because no-one can afford it
for so long. I don’t let that affect me too much. At forty,
you are no longer the same dancer who is twenty-five
forever. The question of motivation becomes increasingly important: why are you on the scene, why are you
exposing yourself ? Over the years, the issues you deal
with and your intentions necessarily become more radical
and more important.
A dancer above all
ow do you see the position of performer,
when you merely perform someone else’s
choreography or performance?
It has been a long while since I was last in that kind of
situation. Lately, whenever I was working with someone,
it was a co-authorship, in which I could stand behind
my material. I love working with people and it feels
great to be in somebody’s world, interpreting their ideas in my own way, offering answers. But it was never
easy for me to perform someone else’s choreography, in
the sense of copying their movements. I find it hard to
penetrate into material that comes from someone else’s
body. That is harder than ballet for me, because in ballet
the dance elements are public domain, a given form in
H
Movements 23 | 24 _ 133
which different combinations can be arranged. When
the fascination with somebody else’s movement and
the desire to embody it wanes, you start to question the
purpose of such a performance.
¬ When you find yourself in the position of a choreographer, how do you present the idea you want
to realize to the dancers, how does the transfer of
material between you and the performers happen?
When I started doing authorial dance work, I tried
to merge myself as an aut hor and t he performers
performing my work. I only did it once, in the show
Cardio-adapter, performed by dancers Zrinka Šimičić
Mihanović and Maja Marjančić. Despite its success and
my love toward that piece, I came to realize that I do not
really understand the position of the author of a piece
that I do not perform myself, because I am, above all
else, a dancer, a performer. Sometimes I find myself in
the position of a choreographer while working with the
high-school students I teach, and then I try to lead the
dancers through a process in which they explore movement on their own, and we build a choreography in that
way. Several times I have worked as a choreographer in
dramatic plays. Here I also tried to lead the performers
(actors) in an exploration of sorts, but there is usually
not enough time and space for that. Formally arranging
steps to rhythm and music and teaching somebody that,
creating figures and geometric formations – that is not
my domain. I made do when it was necessary, let’s put
it that way.
¬ Which choreographers or other collaborators do
you find inspiring to work with, as a performer or
co-author?
Among the collaborations where I was hired as a
dancer I first of all have to mention Nancy Seitz-McIntyre,
who gave me my first opportunity after the Academy,
by hiring me in her Desperate Figures Dance Company.
She had an intuitive, playful approach to choreography;
we based our work on objects, situations, sometimes on
music. Then Irma Omerzo; the dedication and trust she
gives to her dancers were immeasurably valuable. Since
I returned to Croatia, I’ve become deeply involved with
the scene: my Rijeka connection is rooted in my highschool days and the Labis, whose members included Žak
Valenta, Gordana Svetopetrić and Edvin Liverić, artists
with whom I still collaborate today at the Trafik4 . The
4
Trafik was founded in Rijeka in 1988 as a transitional-fictional
theatre, by Magdalena Lupi (artistic director), Žak Branko Valenta, Iva
Nerina Sibila, Edvin Liverić, Alex Đaković, Lara Badurina, Ivan Šarar
134 _ Kretanja 23 | 24
Trafik was where I met Iva Nerina Sibila, with whom I
intensively collaborate nowadays at the IMRC5 and on
other projects. We follow and support each other even
when we are working apart. It was similar with Mila
Čuljak, Selma Banich, Magdalena Lupi, Josip Maršić,
Marin Alvir – also Trafikers. We are like a family, even
when we do not see each other for a long time. While
working on my own projects at the Kik Melone group, I
had collaborations which turned into long-time relationships of mutual teaching and support: with Darko Japelj,
Nataša Govedić, Pavao Hediler… In a similar way, for
many years I have been bound to Marina Petković Liker
and Sonja Pregrad’s organization Četveroruka. Because
of these collaborations based on intense connection and
mutual trust, I find it hard to imagine settling for anything less than that in the future.
¬ What does it mean for you to perform, to perform
for yourself, to perform for someone else, and how do
you feel about the difference between performing in
everyday situations as opposed to performing when
it is considered a performance?
I am sometimes aware of performing in everyday
situations, but often I am not, or I simply do not care
about it. This socially constructed performativity, if
that is what we are talking about, is a very interesting
field, but I rarely relate it to performing in the theatrical
sense. A theatre performance, for me, is a specific sort
of communication between people, with a heightened
intensity. The performance is simultaneously happening for me and for others, it happens between us. If
it is dislocated from this space in between, it becomes
problematic. It is incredibly stressful when a gap in
communication arises during a performance. Scene presence and shades of consciousness while I perform are
the subject matter I work on. Eight years ago, I thought
that my obsessive need to perform was something akin
to exhibitionism, and thus the Exhibition (Ekshibicija)
performance was born, in co-authorship with Andreja
Košavić and Maja Marjančić, but this exhibitionism is
one-way, as opposed to performances, which are an
act of sharing. I never had a problem with exposing
my insecurity or vulnerability on stage. I do not think
and Boba Bundalo. Over the years, the Trafik has expanded its network
of permanent and occasional associates of various artistic spheres,
and its aesthetics fuses physical theater, miming, contemporary dance,
visual theatre and location-based theatre.
5
The IMRC (Integrated Movement Research Collective) has been
working since 2012, under the leadership of Iva Nerina Sibila and Amela Pašalić, and is a meeting point for dancers both with and without
disabilities.
interview: Silvia Marchig a performance has to be perfect to be performed in
front of an audience, quite the contrary, certain cracks
in the performance contribute to the humanity and
imperfection which establishes a relationship of trust
and empathy.
¬ When you perform your own pieces, do you see
yourself as a performer or as an author?
While I perform, it is one and the same to me. When
I perform in a performance created by someone else,
for example Irma Omerzo’s Threesoloists (Trisolistice), at
that moment I am an author as well, the author of that
performance, even though she is the author of the choreography. Performing is an authorial act. Everything else
can be called authorial work in choreography, direction,
dramaturgy, concept; but a performance is an authorial
act of the person on stage. So it feels strange for me to
be an author and not be on the stage, because I am none
of the above, I am a dancer.
¬ Is there any difference to your approach between
when you create your own performances and when
you work as a co-author?
When I collaborate as a performer in someone else’s
piece, I am more relaxed because I leave the responsibility
for why something is being done to someone else; I am
here to offer material and participate in what is being
done. As to why something is being done, that is a key
issue and one I feel very responsible for when I am the
author myself. Since I am usually involved in collaborative co-authorships, the question of what is being done
and why is a matter of negotiation. Regardless of my
position, I take great responsibility for my part of the
work. I never come to a rehearsal unprepared, whether
I am the author and producer of a project or merely a
costume advisor.
¬ How do you prepare?
Preparations often include contemplating, reading,
researching. Opening up questions, analyzing, daydreaming. When I talk about preparation, I primarily refer to
my state of mind when coming to a rehearsal. If I am
the author myself, I always come prepared with a plan
or at least with an initial proposition, a more or less
articulated idea of what I would like to try out, where to
start from. I try to be honest with myself and others and
listen to my authentic needs, and not fantasize about my
own or another person’s expectations. I try to be open
and attentive. When I am just a performer, I am more
relaxed, softer in my approach, but my concentration is
essentially the same.
Authorial and aesthetic negotiations
hat provokes you, on a performing, exploring, authorial, social, political level?
I am interested in people, relationships
between people. I deal with performativity in the sense of
intensive and complex communication. That is a constant
topic of mine; the way I approach it depends on the project. Affects and emotions, attitudes, relations, structures,
organizations, all of those are themes of choreography.
There is truth in the romantic idea that the body can
communicate something completely different than what
we communicate in words. I am currently focused on the
relationship between body and words, or the theatrical
signifier; at the same time, I deal with the relationship
between immediate sensory experiences and processed,
rational ones. Earlier, I tried to create from a point of
understanding the system of signs which, taken together,
communicate something. I feel as if I am currently simplifying this system of signs, I am peeling away the layers
of meaning so as to come closer to what is communicated
by the body. It is close to the utopia of returning to the
innocence of experience. This, of course, is impossible
– once you are immersed into the system of signs and
signifiers, you cannot wash yourself clean of it. Take, for
example, Raimund Hoghe’s Swan Lake. An audience who
is not informed about the history of dance cannot perceive
the referential nature of the performance, and interprets
the action on the stage completely differently than someone who can connect all of it through knowledge and
experience. Actually, I love intelligent authors and performances, but I have no love for performances – intellectual
acrobatics – which aim only for intellectual understanding.
A gut-feeling is much more powerful.
W
¬ How do you choose collaborators?
Usually intuitively. Collaboration is preceded by
socialization; a clear desire to work together tends to
emerge.
¬ What inspires you to do so?
A common interest, a mutual understanding, a fascination. Often someone tells me or shows me something
that surprises me, something new, unexpected. That is a
great source of motivation. We do not necessarily have
to be like-minded.
¬ Which methods do you use in your creative work?
Methods, and naming them, are an open question for
me. I’ve experimented with it by teaching workshops,
trying to see how my methods change in different groups,
when I am not working with close associates. I cannot
Movements 23 | 24 _ 135
step back from it sufficiently to be able to analyze it
correctly. In the last couple of years my works seem to
be continuations of one another; one could call that a
method – an issue that emerges as crucial at the end of
one process becomes the starting point of the next process. The imperative of financing requires us to stage a
new performance every year; or all of this might be one
and the same process which will only yield its results in
ten years. Or maybe never. I don’t think that this makes
my performances works in progress, I am not trying to
use this as an excuse for incompleteness: they are always
finished articles, but they are a part of a greater process. In
the studio, I find it very efficient to treat every rehearsal
as a performance, which entails complete concentration
and longer sequences, working on the performative side
of it. An opposite method would be to rehearse discrete
scenes, like editing individual parts. It is interesting to
let the work unfold on its own and try not to separate
the performance from talking about the performance. I
want to work on this further; I want my next work to
be a fusion of the two.
authors question their own artistic expressions and
identities; for now, you nevertheless seem to be favoring group work?
I love being around people and working in a group.
When I do perform a solo performance, I carry with me
the influence of everyone I have worked with in recent
years. My latest solos include a direct relationship with
the audience; I am not completely alone in these solos.
I don’t know, I guess I don’t know how to work alone.
I have never created something completely on my own.
Maybe one day I will. I do not run away from it, but it
hasn’t been interesting to me so far. In As Long as We’re
Together, a solo I created for 15 Years of Trafik (15 godina Trafika) and Four-handedness – a Small Performative
Conference (Četverorukost – mala izvedbena konferencija)
organized by Sonja Pregrad and Marina Petković Liker,
I look at the audience in a mirror, and the performance
arises from direct communication. Just like in my solo at
the Museum of Contemporary Art, my starting point is
performance as a medium which takes shape in relation
to the audience.
¬ During these processes, do you run into difficulties
or specific recurring situations? I am not referring to
outside conditions, under-financing or inadequate
facilities, but to the process itself.
Difficulties are, at the same time, challenges. One of
them is definitely the simultaneous nature of production
and self-reflection. It is impossible to wade deep into
the process and at the same time keep an analytical distance from it. Well, it isn’t, but it entails a different sort
of subjectivity. Darko Japelj and I were co-authors and
performers in Carousel (Karusel) in 2009, and were part
of the process ourselves; in 2010 we worked on This Is
(Not) My Forest and in 2011 on Glory, Glory Hamlelujah!
With Nataša Govedić, who was also the author, but she
didn’t perform. These two modes of work are vastly
different. On the one side, the presence of an external
observer greatly facilitates work, it is a source of support
and a focal point, a witness that observes and notes what
we overlooked, and offers new content to what is being
performed. At the same time, it assumes a lot of responsibility for the decision-making process; its observation
influences the performance even before any feedback is
given. Balancing between the decisions of the performer-author and the witness-author (dramaturge) requires
a lot of effort, mutual trust, tolerance, self-criticism – just
like any other intense emotional personal relationship.
¬ Aside from the division of decision-making power,
what are the most common subjects of negotiation
during a group-authorship process?
We negotiate about the priorities each of us has, about
motivations, about our visions of what it is we are doing
together. I increasingly believe in coexistence and respect
in collaboration, and I feel less and less that we need to
agree on every count.
¬ The (female) solo is considered the fundamental
form in contemporary dance, through which the
136 _ Kretanja 23 | 24
Do you perceive improvisation as a tool for choreography, a standalone discipline, or something else?
I see improvisation as a tool for choreography. It is a
term I seldom use, actually. If I need to name the process
I employ while doing something new, I just call it work,
creation, exploration. Improvisation implies a specific
form; that is what it is. Of course, it is great that improvisation is being affirmed and nurtured as a stage form or
standalone discipline, but it is not something I am overly
interested in. During a performance, improvisation is
something I find interesting, but not because it moves
away from my written choreographies. I am not fascinated by improvisation as the opposite of choreographed
material, it is not my area of interest.
¬ You came to the open rehearsal of Glacier (Glečer)
at the Museum of Contemporary Art with some theses
and an approximate plan, but you left a lot of freedom
to explore unknown spaces and situations – you didn’t
know who would come and whether the people who
interview: Silvia Marchig did would be an obstacle or a resource to you. You
didn’t start with a structure that could be filled with
content, but from that potential content or emptiness,
which can also be perceived as content. You created
the structure there and then; in other words, you
coordinated the action. It also seemed to me that you
had decided in advance what you wanted to verbalize
and, while you were focused on the narrative content,
you let your body guide you and move how it wanted,
at least it seemed that way – I assumed you controlled
your words and motions to the same extent.
Talking and improvising at the same time is complex,
but challenging. In my last couple of pieces it has proven
to be an interesting process. At that rehearsal I wanted
to explore the living tissue of a performance which is
created in the moment when all of us together perform,
and I couldn’t delineate exactly what I would go through,
because I wanted whatever I would go through to be
shaped by the response of the others; I gave up on the
illusion that things can be predicted ahead of time. I do
not construct frames so that I could build something
within them. I first have to become aware of the content
before I can set up a frame, or form a frame then and
there, with the feedback of the audience. That is why
it’s hard for me to work as a scene movement associate
in dramatic performances, filling up these choreography
spaces. At first I have some sort of generator for my
material; I do not know where I want to arrive, but I
know what my thesis, question or current proposition
is, what it I that I would like to explore with a certain
group. Most often, I set up this proposition in the form
of a performative phenomenon.
¬ What about the relations between body, space
and music?
The font of my creation lies within the domain of
performance, specifically in the phenomenon of performing. The relations between body, space and time are
not in focus here. They are there and I deal with them,
they can be treated as content, but that is actually rather
rare. Space is a given, geometrical space, but mental space
as well – imaginary architecture. Dialogue with music
was a subject I tackled in Cardio-adapter, in which we
collaborated with composer Sven Pavlović, who created
the music for the play from his own authorial impulse,
and in Autos, where Igor Hofbauer on the drums and I
shared an egalitarian performing relationship. In Stoker
of the Sun (Ložač Sunca), Monika Gajić played live, and a
special dialogue of obsession with movement and sound
occurred; Nenad Hrgetić composed the original score for
Glory, Glory, likewise approaching the subject autono-
mously. In Carousel, This Is (Not) My Forest, and Exotica,
we approached music conceptually at first. However,
Monteverdi’s Orpheus in the first part of Forest carries
such an emotional charge that it exceeds all expectations of the chosen concept. In Il bastone del diavolo
Mila Čuljak and I wanted to dance to Giovanna Daffini’s
revolutionary songs, to give ourselves the pleasure and
relaxation of dancing to music. In the end, we held a
rod while the music played. On the one hand, we once
again approached music conceptually, because we didn’t
choose Giovanna Daffini to get immersed in her sound,
but because of her lyrics which carry a revolutionary
message; on the other hand, the vibration of her voice
meant a lot to us. It is not just about the lyrics and the
message, but also about what’s underneath it all, what
is inexpressible through speech, something that music
pours directly into the listener. I am curious what it will
be like in our next piece, a collaboration with composer
Ana Horvat who will also be performing.
Different types of responsibility
ow do you contemplate form?
I am not interested in form, but I am aware
that form and content are mutually conditioned.
I deal with content, the form comes out of that. I do not
understand or appreciate anesthetization, formalism – by
that, I mean focusing on shape, appearance and style
with no essential reason. I focus on it if it reinforces
the content. For me, the masters of form are masters
of content – when the form and content of a piece are
inseparable.
H
¬ Lately we have been using the term “choreographic practice”. How do you define practice in choreography in a broader sense, not just in the sense of
choreography as composition?
Choreography is the organization of bodies, space and
time. That is the process I am involved in, but I find it
difficult to say that I am a choreographer; I think I have
insufficiently explored forms to be able to claim that. It
is hard for me to define myself. Just like I had a crisis of
identity because I couldn’t say that I was a ballerina, I
encounter and identity crisis when I have to claim that
I am a choreographer. I never formally studied the tried
and tested ways of organizing bodies in space and time,
and I feel like a dilettante when I start defining what that
means for me. The concept of choreography practice is,
for me, focused on the process, not on the piece. On the
duration, and not on the function of the staging. This
term belongs to the new generation; they should be the
ones to define it.
Movements 23 | 24 _ 137
¬ So, you lean more towards the concept of authorial practice?
If I have to define my work, that is what I do, yes.
¬ By choreography in a broader sense, I was referring to the elasticity of dance, to the fact that movement in dance can take a step back from the other
elements of the performance – not always and not
with all authors – but dance often gives up its dancing
essence or reduces it to a minimum, while the choreographic interest focuses on the problematizing of
performing procedures, media, models of authorship,
conditions of work and the like, while taking into
account the existing models of society and observing
the performing arts from the outside.
It all depends on the focus. If the focus is on the
body in space and time, I guess it is choreography, or
dance. Talking about dance can be dance if we focus on
the positioning of our bodies during the conversation;
if we focus on something else, a conversation can be a
sociological study, for example, because the focus is on
two or more people talking about dance.
¬ Do you call what you do dance?
Yes. Because the focus is still on the body, which is
autonomous from the rational. But it is not just dance.
And yes, it is definitely more of an authorial practice
than a choreographic one, you are right.
¬ It is impossible to come to a definitive conclusion
about the present and the processes that are still
ongoing, but I assume you have some sort of idea
about the position of your work and yourself on the
scene?
I never had the need to share interests with large
groups of people. My motivation for dancing was
always more important to me than what other people
were doing. I founded Kik Melone with Igor Hofbauer
because it wasn’t easy for me to find a colleague of mine
with whom I could found a troupe, because it entails
the responsibility of working with that person for the
next, let’s say, fifteen years. I decided to found an artistic
organization with a colleague from a different artistic
profession because we were not bound by it in any way,
and we are good childhood friends who trust each other.
That was not the only reason; we socialize, collaborate,
exchange idea, understand each other. Even though we
are currently not collaborating on any specific projects,
we do work together in some zones. Some colleagues of
mine are very dear and close to me and I love working
with them, but not in a way that entails creating authorial
138 _ Kretanja 23 | 24
work together. I do not think I am more special than
anyone else, but I found it hard to join a group, and I
still do. I currently enjoy working with several people,
and I hope I will work with them for a long time. It is
hard for me to define what it is that I do, I think that is
your job, to analyze it and write about it. I do not see
differences or similarities between people on the scene,
there must be something that connects us, because we
all work in harsh conditions, which brings us together
and marks us; it is definitely noticeable in our work. That
sort of solidarity is very important. I feel I belong on this
scene inasmuch I feel solidarity with my colleagues, I
learn from them, I follow their work, collaborate with
some of them, but I don’t think I belong in any aesthetic
or ideological sense.
¬ The observer and the performer: do you think
that the performer is in a superior position, or is
it the other way around? A performer prepares the
performance for a certain amount of time, while the
audience watches it relatively unprepared, however
much they try to prepare by viewing the performer’s
previous works, reading, familiarizing themselves
with the dance situation; and in most cases, he gets
to do it just once.
A performer’s responsibility is a different kind of
responsibility from the audience’s one. Performers, or
authors, prepare the stage, set the rules of the game, and
have a greater possibility to manipulate the situation. The
stage is, in a way, a position of power. Just like in any
other interpersonal relationship, especially in contrasting
ones. It is an interesting question, how far can you go by
bringing these two types of responsibility together, by
opening a zone of exchange in which there is a tendency
towards creating an equilibrium between the performer’s and the audience’s engagement. When I was very
young, I wondered who gave me the right to step onto
the stage for other people to look at me, because that felt
so natural and great for me. But it is not a given, it is a
question, an issue: who are the people who can say – you
are going to watch me now. What kind of responsibility
does that entail?
¬ Can an artist be autonomous nowadays, without
pandering to financiers, programmers, audiences,
trends?
I see the position of the artist primarily as a position of great responsibility that the artist primarily has
towards himself. The artist has that right and it is a
necessity to question the motives – why are the things
you do important, when all you actually do is senseless? I
interview: Silvia Marchig do not believe that art is here to enrich our souls or that
I dance because I wouldn’t be able to live otherwise. I
would, I try not to get carried away by romantic notions.
Thinking further about who my art is for, I think that an
artist’s autonomy is not in conflict with the imperative
not to become autistic. We all work within a system
of signifiers, and art only becomes interesting when
somebody questions the existing system of signifiers, or
creates his own. The communicative nature of a work
of art is important, but it shouldn’t pander to anyone. I
also do not believe that a true work of art should communicate with every Earthling, because it is a work of
authentic human nature. The art of an Amazonian tribe
means as little to me as our art means to them; we can
narrow down this lack of understanding, to people who
live here in Zagreb with us, or in the same neighborhood. I doubt most of my and your neighbors know or
care about what has happened in contemporary dance
in the last twenty years. Things become problematic
here, because art is financed by public spending. Despite
that, the autonomy of art is a legacy of our civilization,
just like free healthcare or anything else that works for
the benefit of everyone. That is why art shouldn’t be
subject to market forces or social conditions; it simply
cannot be judged by the same criteria. That would be
ruinous, we would go back to the system of patronage,
and everybody would dance to the rich man’s tune. The
question is who should set these general criteria, what
is our profession. Luckily, we are such a small country
that we are merely a part of a wider European context,
and although we are aware of it, we still have our own,
slightly anarchic space of freedom. In all of this it is
not easy to stay true to your own authentic motivation;
perhaps it is an illusion. Be that as it may, I still believe
in that, and it is important for me to focus on things
that matter to me; this is no time for trivialities. Perhaps
there was once room for such things, but the conditions
are radicalizing.
Ivana Slunjski is an independent critic and performance art
researcher. She works as an editor and contributor in many
printed media, occasionally publishing for Croatian Radio’s
Channel Three, and in other books and anthologies. She is
currently interested in recent innovative performance practices, strategies of resistance to the economic undermining of
artistic work, and the development of new models of artistic
exchange. She advocates the professionalization of writing
about dance. She graduated in comparative literature and
Croatian language and literature at the Faculty of Humanities
and Social Sciences in Zagreb.
Movements 23 | 24 _ 139
predstava: Identity MOVE.
Project!, Rearranging (and) the
self-arranged
predstava: Identity MOVE. Project!, Rearranging (and) the self-arranged < Identity MOVE. Project!, Rearranging (and) the self-arranged, Foto: Tomislav Sporiš >
NATAŠA GOVEDIĆ
Plesom
misliti ples:
uz izvedbe
Sonje Pregrad
„Sva je teorija protiv slobodne volje,
sve ju naše iskustvo potvrđuje.”
Samuel Johnson
I
straživanje pokreta u koreografskom i plesačkom opusu
Sonje Pregrad na različite je načine vezano za dosljedno
iskustveno mapiranje improvizacijskog, odnosno pozadinski ili lateralno skriptiranog koreografskog impulsa. Pregrad
je jedna od osnivačica improvizacijskog festivala Improspekcije, zatim i suzačetnica međunarodnog projekta TASK
(u kojem su koreografi pozvani međusobno razmjenjivati i
odgovarati na metodološke principe plesnog stvaralaštva).
Autorica je niza samostalnih i zajedničkih projekata u kojima vlastitu struju korporalne svijesti oblikuje s obzirom na
specifične socijalne koordinate međutnosti (in-betweeness)
kao relacije koja nastaje između ili u kontaktnom prostoru
plesačkog tijela i tijela publike. Kao plesna umjetnica sustavno participira u plesnim projektima takozvane otvorene
procesnosti, primjerice u suradnjama s Isabelle Schad, Zrinkom Šimičić, Zrinkom Užbinec, Marjanom Krajač, Johannom
Chemnitz, Lejom Jurišić, Nives Sertić, Irmom Omerzo, Sa-
njom Iveković, Pavlom Heidlerom, Silviom Marchig itd. No
Sonju Pregrad možda bi bilo najtočnije opisati kao umjetnicu
„entelehije plesnog impulsa” ili mišljenja plesom o plesu
u nas, kako taj specifični smjer naziva Jean A. Schweizer
u svojoj knjizi Nova koreografija svijesti (2011). Riječ je o
autorskoj orijentaciji koja, za razliku od brojnih pozitivističkih i konstruktivističkih pristupa plesu, ne podupire kriterij
prema kojem jasno definirana i elaborirana plesna tehnika
nužno mora stajati ispred i iznad brojnih „nestrukturiranih”
izboja ili „viškova” utjelovljenosti s obzirom na to da tijelo
neizbježno djeluje i nezavisno od socijalnih i koreografskih
forma koje ga modeliraju. Sonju Pregrad zanima upravo
ta manje vidljiva, slabije deklarativna hipersvijest tjelesne
percepcije i propriocepcije reflektirana i stalno iznova artikulirana tijela; zanima ju kako biti pokazano, propitano i
prisutno tijelo, koje misli i svoju kinetiku i svoju afektivnu
jezgru i svoja ideologijska punjenja.
Movements 23 | 24 _ 141
predstava: Identity MOVE. Project!, Rearranging (and) the self-arranged
Ambicioznost takva projekta tijela može se usporediti i s
tekstom Jean-Luca Nancyja pod naslovom Korpus (2008), u
kojem tijelo postoji samo u nizu otpora svojoj „očiglednosti” i „funkcionalnosti”. To je tijelo koje istodobno čita sebe
i svoj okoliš, ali i ispisuje relacijske koordinate zapamćene i
trenutačno uspostavljene susretnosti, dakle veoma budno i
elokventno tijelo. Istaknula bih da u ovom trenutku plesne
povijesti mnogi plesači pokušavaju slijediti spomenuti trend
tiranije impulsa, bolje rečeno otvoriti pogledu publike neku
vrstu aktualizirane plesne samosvijesti, ali pritom često zaboravljaju na refleksivnost plesne rečenice, zapadajući u
samomanirizme koji postaju (jedinom) svrhom samima sebi
i koji izbjegavaju i konceptualnu razradu i udubljivanje u poetička i u politička pitanja izlaganja plesnog tijela.
Sonja Pregrad u tom je smislu veoma utjecajna iznimka,
jer s velikom skrupuloznošću tijekom mnogih godina bavljenja
plesom demonstrira da tijelo samo po sebi nije imuno ni na
taloge ponavljanja, ni na različite dimenzije predvidljivosti,
umora, zalihosti, boli, težine, općih mjesta, citata, sjećanja,
prenaučenih i omiljenih gesta – ali stvar je u tome da ih ne
cenzuriramo i ne fotošopiramo, nego da ih budemo što svjesniji, gotovo u brehtijanskoj relaciji prepoznavanja konvencije
da bismo ju mikroskopirali i samim time oslobodili mehaničke ispraznosti ponavljanja. Na taj način Pregrad djeluje
kao aktivistica protiv različitih vrsta automatizirane izvedbe.
Intenzitet njezina plesnog mišljenja plesa nadalje svjesno
ide protiv naivne spontanosti plesnog asociranja pokretom.
Izbor stalna sondiranja i favoriziranja korporalnog impulsa u
mnogim površnim improvizacijskim izvedbama kojima sam
svjedočila ne dospijeva raditi na vlastitu zrenju, niti dopušta
promjenu uvriježene plesačke manire, često uvirući i izvirući
iz tijela na način na koji to čini glazbena vježba slobodnog
asociranja tonske modulacije ili spontana vježba apstraktnog
slikanja, čiji je jedini cilj razigravanje slikarske ruke. Hoću reći
da je u improvizacijskim tehnikama spontanost veoma upitne
kvalitete: mnogo je važnija refleksivnost te spontanosti, a
upravo je u toj dimenziji Sonja Pregrad jedinstveno fokusiran
i originalan performer hrvatske nezavisne scene.
Za mene je veoma važan problem koji otvaraju njezine
izvedbe vezan i za filozofsko promišljanje instancije slobodne
volje. Paradoksalno, višak slobodnog odlučivanja o pokretu
tijekom izvedbene akceleracije svijesti istodobno zahtijeva i
veću samosvijest isprobavanja neiskušanih matrica tjelesne
ekspresije, ali i veću analitičku spremnost na samokontrolu,
samokorekciju i samonadzor. To znači da plesačica poput Sonje Pregrad vježba pluralnost kinetičke i analitičke svijesti,
pa čak i brojne kontradikcije ili produktivne sudare slobode
i navike, u kojima je sve vrijeme spremna raditi i na aktualizacijama pokreta i na alternativama izabranoj sekvenciji
pokreta. U plesnoj predstavi Form and Mass (2014) koreografkinje Isabelle Schad, Sonja Pregrad pristaje biti plesačko
142 _ Kretanja 23 | 24
tijelo kotrljano scenom zajedno s nagomilanim crnim vrećama, pristaje se pretvoriti u bezobličnu površinu tamne mase,
„bez repa i glave” ili samo s repom i ponekim od iščašeno
ispruženih udova, tijelo isprepleteno s neživom materijom
do te mjere da ne znamo gdje počinje i gdje prestaje težina
mnogostrukog objekta ili iza koje se geometrijske površine
„živih predmeta” nazire njegova nevidljiva pokretačica; ljudski
subjekt. Ekologija takva sažimanja i prožimanja žive i nežive
materije stvara određenu ekokomunalnost izvedbe u kojoj
više ne postoji hijerarhija živosti. Jednako tako ne postoji ni
klasično autorstvo nad razmijenjenom kinetičkom energijom.
Pregrad se u svojim predstavama eksplicitno naslanja na
fenomenološki rad Merleau-Pontyja, dakle na respekt prema življenom, a ne samo estetički uvježbavanu i akademski
discipliniranu plesnom tijelu, ali u njezinu su radu prisutne i
brojne postmodernističke i feminističke teorijske implikacije
plesne umjetnosti, točnije rečeno prisutna je duboka sumnja
prema tome da je bilo vrijednost bilo vrlinu i njihove tjelesne
manifestacije ikada moguće obuzdati definitivnim ili zatvorenim opisom te duboka kritička svijest o tome da postoje ikakvi
fiksni parametri ispravno postavljena ženskog tijela na plesnoj
sceni, posebno parametri čija bi se arhistruktura naslanjala
na ideologije docilnih i bestežinskih baletnih tijela. Kao što
nas upozorava Janet Wolff1 , plesno tijelo koje pruža otpor
baletnoj normativnosti plesa riskira tumačenja koja impliciraju
tobožnju „grotesknost” ili „karnevalesknost” rodne izvedbe,
no zapravo su samo još jedno svjedočanstvo do koje je mjere
tjelesnost prizorište najjače i najsurovije socijalne kontrole,
koja ne tolerira nikakve transgresije propisana izgledanja i
ponašanja. Tome nasuprot, znanje ženskog tijela spremnog
otvoriti pitanja „rodne drame” pokazanog fizisa seže u samu
jezgrenu definiciju suvremenog plesa, točnije rečeno dio je
konstitutivnih izvedaba vještica kao što su Isadora Duncan,
Mary Wigman ili Martha Graham. U Hrvatskoj je tradicija
ženskog plesnog sola prepuna prekida i izoliranih nastupa,
odnosno veoma se teško uspostavlja na način jednog od
preduvjeta autorskog izričaja. Zbog toga rad Sonje Pregrad
ima i brojne pedagoške dimenzije poklanjanja istraživačkih
dozvola kolegicama i kolegama, kao i izdržavanja plesne epistemologije koja zna da ne zna što sve tijelo može odigrati,
proizvesti, potisnuti i prizvati, ali pristaje na stalno saznavanje
osluškivanjem vlastita korpusa.
Nezahvalno je izdvajati pojedine izvedbe iz opusa Sonje
Pregrad jer su njihova stilistička i ideologijska obilježja veoma
bogata i raznovrsna, ali moj je izbor da se ovom prigodom
podrobnije zadržim na predstavi Identity MOVE. Project!,
Rearranging (and) the self-arranged, koju je u proljeće 2015.
1
Usp. tekst „Reinstating Corporeality: Feminism and Body Politics”, iz Meaning in Motion: New Cultural Studies of Dance urednice
Jane C. Desmond, Duke University Press, Durham, 1997, str. 86-87.
predstava: Identity MOVE. Project!, Rearranging (and) the self-arranged Sonja Pregrad izvela s vizualnom umjetnicom Nives Sertić u
sklopu festivala PLATFORMA HR.
Na samom početku izvedbe dvije nas umjetnice dočekuju
naslonjene na dovratak glazbenoscenskog kluba Močvara.
Lakonskim tonom obavještavaju publiku da će upravo pogledati predstavu koja bi se trebala baviti pitanjem identiteta, ali
„riječ i-den-ti-tet zvuči nekako užasno neudobno u ustima
i teško ju je izgovarati” (Pregrad to ipak čini s vidljivim, humornim naporom iskrivljavanja usta), usput priznajući da je
identitet doista bio tema njihove nedavne rezidencije u Pragu
na osnovi koje je nastala predstava koja se upravo ima dogoditi. Odjevene su u kratke hlačice i ljetnu sportsku odjeću.
Ulaskom u zamračeni zatvoreni prostor započinje izvedba
opisivanja otvorenih prostora, pri čemu Pregrad, gledajući publiku i mnoge žice projekcijskih uređaja rastegnute po
podu pozornice među gledateljima, kuratorski komentira
kako pred sobom vidi „Nebo. Oblake. Sunce izlazi i zalazi.
Vjetar.” Nives Sertić pita ju: „Misliš da sam ja vjetar?” na
što dobiva potvrdni odgovor. Sertić nastavlja: „Ali prošli put
nisi pričala o prirodi. I – zapravo – to je (pokazuje prašinu
koju je upravo pomela) najbliže što se u teatru uopće možeš približiti prirodi. Teatar ne može ugostiti prirodu. Prošli
put si na početku plesala.” Na velikom projekcijskom platnu
koje dominira lijevom stranom pozornice pritom se rasprostire fotografija livade. Sertić ponovno destabilizira ono što
vidimo, postavljajući publici pitanje: „Reflektiram li ja ovu
prirodu kad je snimam ili ona mene reflektira?” U nastavku,
priopćava nam da je „svaka pojedina sjemenka najsitniji samoorganizirani mikrokozmos”, ali i da se sama Nives Sertić
„ne osjeća kao vjetar, niti razumije logiku vjetra”. Na to joj
Sonja Pregrad odgovara da je mjesto na kojem se nalazimo
„ipak i dalje priroda, makar je ono istodobno i kazalište”.
Dokazni materijal stvara spuštajući se polagano na sve četiri,
u prirodni položaj animalnog tijela, sve više vitlajući repom
svoje duge kose i sve teže dišući, frkćući, naposljetku izvodeći
seriju padanja na bokove i stražnjicu uz glasan zvuk struganja gole kože o pod (naglašavanje težine i mase tijela te
karakteristično senzualni floorwork na tragu Doris Humphrey
stalna su obilježja koreografskog rada Sonje Pregrad). Reakcije publike variraju od zabavljena smijuckanja do nekoliko
profesionalnih plesača u gledalištu koji s nelagodom među
sobom komentiraju žensko tijelo koje si dopušta namjernu,
naglašenu, burlesknu, zaigranu, nepretencioznu, duhovitu
nezgrapnost. Pregrad se uopće ne zbunjuje; nastavlja seriju
padova koji u novim ponavljanjima stječu gotovo manifestni
karakter glazbenosti susreta kože, poda, zvuka i gravitacije
(pljes – pljes pljes – pljes…). Izvođačica nam se zatim obraća.
Pregrad: Kako podrovati mehanizme uprizorenja? Obukle
smo se kao turisti. Uprizorile smo same sebe kao lažne turistice u lažnoj prirodi. Snimile smo lažne turističke fotografije,
s lažnim entuzijazmom i lažnom razdraganošću, u lažnoj
prirodi praškog botaničkog vrta. Onda smo tom svjetlu i
cvijeću poklonile i lažnu pozornost.
Sertić: A onda je sve postalo zbilja prekrasno.
Taj moment probijanja ironične distancije koja obilježava
prvi dio predstave priznanjem da praški botanički vrt uzgaja
„najveće leptire na svijetu” i zatim serija fotografija Sonje
Pregrad zaigrana, ali i naglašeno estetizirana tijela u prostoru
zelenila stvaraju izrazito liričnu zonu, u kojoj fotografija usana
koje grickaju grančicu ili koljena koje se odmara na pleteru
travki ili bršljana koji se samoinicijativno penje krovištem staklenika uspostavljaju prostor koji nikako ne možemo posvojiti
imenovanjem, jer njegove silnice nisu kontekstno locirane,
nego ih određuje autorska vizura međusobnog gledanja kreatorica izvedbe. U toj etapi izvedbe vanjski se prostor transformira u vizualne metafore unutarnjeg krajolika, dodatno
evocirana i upotrebom velikog zrcala, koje Pregrad uživo
uzima u ruke da njime traži i nalazi Nives Sertić u stvarnom
kazališnom prostoru, ali i da njime intervenira u scenski reproducirane fotografske materijale. Zrcaljenja prizorišta posve
ukidaju podjele na stvarna i virtualna tijela, prirodne i artificijelne prostore. Evokativna kvaliteta fotografija i supostavljanje
nenaseljenih prostora vrtne arhitekture nasuprot organskim
prostorima biljne raskoši botaničkog vrta unutar zatvorene
kazališne kutije pokreću stalnu razmjenu ili bujanje hibrida
ljudskog i biljnog svijeta. To znači da fotorukopis predstave
ne preferira ni prirodu nad kulturom ni kulturu nad prirodom;
vjerojatno je najtočnije reći da traga za specifičnim ekspresivnim jezicima dvostruko i dvosmjerno mobilizirane materije.
Kao i u mnogim drugim izvedbama Sonje Pregrad, vibrantnost materije (ovdje: prirode) nadmašuje status objekta,
postavljajući nam pitanje do koje je mjere svaka materijalna
instancija ujedno potencijalni aktant ili protoaktant, izvorište
ili pokretač nečije tuđe akcije, kako smatra Bruno Latour u
svojoj Politici prirode (2004). Ako materija uvjetuje i modificira našu percepciju, veoma je važno političko pitanje jesmo
li joj u stanju priznati status živosti. Je li svaki atom ujedno
i procesna izvedba? Komu dugujemo razumijevanje prirode
kao pasivne drugosti dominantno ljudskog svijeta? I što točno znači pohraniti slike nekog prošlog promatranja prirode
u kontekstu živa „ljudskog vrta” koji se još naziva kazalište?
Finale predstave filmska je snimka ulaska obiju izvođačica u
prašku kazališnu zgradu i njezin tehnologizirani okoliš, koji
pak citiranjem u prostoru zagrebačke izvedbe postaje komentarom dvostruke izmještenosti umjetnica.
Je li kazalište, dakle, njihov prirodni ili društveni okoliš?
I postoji li analogija između povišene njege organizama unutar botaničke i kazališne kulture? Postoji li uopće
kulturalno netaknut, gledanjima i socijalnim interakcijama
neoskvrnjen okoliš? Što dobivamo tvrdeći da je umjetnost
Movements 23 | 24 _ 143
predstava: Identity MOVE. Project!, Rearranging (and) the self-arranged
artificijelnija od prirode? Umjetnost je posve izvjesno sačinjena od iste građe od koje je sačinjen i korov pred vratima
teatra, baš kao i najsofisticiranije hramske zidine, kaktusi ili
krhka, arhitektonski i geometrijski nadasve elaborirana građevina pčelinje košnice. Priroda je, drugim riječima, modelna
graditeljica i mimetičarka. Dokazuje li možda veći stupanj
deriviranosti materije njezinu neprirodnost? Rastaje li se
procesirano stablo, po nazivu pozornica, s bitnim kvalitetama svojeg drvnog porijekla? Je li i naše tijelo milenijskim
procesima kulturne adaptacije izgubilo kontakt s prirodnim
instinktima ili ih savršeno manifestira na dnevnoj bazi – hranjenjem, mokrenjem, trčanjem, seksualnim praksama itd.?
Je li plesno tijelo umjetnije od življenog tijela?
Ili razuzdanije, slobodnije, neposrednije od mehanike
postojanja?
Predstava Identity MOVE. Project!, Rearranging (and)
the self-arranged sumnja u jednoznačnost odgovora na
navedena pitanja. Gledanje materije, gledanje fotografija
materije, gledanje ljudskog tijela: sve su to prakse ne samo
pokretanja materije nego i preokretanja površne i preletne
strelice vremena s pomoću kojih postajemo svjesni prirodnosti
usrdna pogleda, kao i vlastita refleksivnog instinkta. Kako
veli plesna umjetnica i pedagoginja Bonnie Bainbridge Cohen2 komentirajući fotografije rabljene za ilustraciju različitih
afektivnih stanja kao koreografskih dokumenata: fotografija
je materijalni trag bivanja koji nužno postavlja niz pitanja.
Potencijalnost fotografije navodim prema knjizi Bainbridge
Cohen: emanira li fotografija svoje značenje prema nama?
Ili nas uvlači u sebe? Prelazi li granice svog predstavljanja ili
ostaje unutar svojih zadanih okvira? Je li neutralna, aktivna ili
pasivna? Bilježi li neko iskustvo gubitka? Ili iskustvo dobitka?
Kojim je točno emocijama nabijena? Kojim organima kolaju
emocije koje bilježi tijelo na slici? Kako teče energija između
tijela i prostora na fotografiji? Možemo li živim tijelom odgovoriti na fotografirano tijelo? Zanimljivo je da se interakcijska susvijest zaustavljena gledanja (fotografije) i dinamičkog
gledanja (improvizacijske izvedbe) koju predlaže Bainbridge
Cohen može samo donekle primijeniti na izvedbu Nives Sertić
i Sonje Pregrad, jer kompozicijsko načelo njihova snimanja
i manifestiranja tijela u prostoru skriva i/ili fragmentira cjelovitost tijela i prostora, na taj način pretvarajući gledanje u
svojevrsno zagonetanje, a ne odgonetanje. Drugim riječima,
samo umjetnice vide širu sliku svog praškog iskustva, dok
je pogled publike strogo kontroliran različitim redukcijama i
rezovima perspektive.
Sličnu dramaturgiju fantomskog ili filmskom projekcijom posredovana, naglašeno odmaknuta, a opet kamerom
2
Cit. prema Sensing, Feeling, and Action: The Experiential Anatomy of Body-Mind Centering, Contact Editions, Northampton, 1993,
str. 40.
144 _ Kretanja 23 | 24
neposredno prizvana tijela u prostor žive izvedbe Pregrad
primjenjuje i u predstavi Vrijednost je dinamički višak svake
funkcije (2014), koju osmišljava zajedno s Marjanom Krajač.
Rasprava o tome koliko sati učenja, vježbanja, razmišljanja,
putovanja, dodatnih radionica, čitanja, pisanja i raspravljanja
ulazi u plesačku profesiju ponovno je s jedne strane ironični
komentar njezine društvene marginaliziranosti, ali i implicitna
pohvala stvaralaštvu, čiji se viškovi sasvim sigurno ne mogu
izraziti ni matematičkim ni ekonomski izmjerivim parametrima. Publika je u prostoru s odsutnim, snimljenim i Skypeom
posredovanim tijelom Sonje Pregrad, pri čemu su u izvedbu
kratko umontirani i prizori vrta ispred zgrade Akademije likovnih umjetnosti te Škole za balet i ritmiku u Zagorskoj ulici
u kojoj Pregrad ima svoj privremeni atelje.
I tu se topika vrta pojavljuje kao signal autonomije umjetničkog prostora, zaštićena, akoprem i izolirana, ali svakako
nužno potrebna za plesnu produkciju. U kontekstu hrvatske
javne scene, na kojoj kronično nedostaje plesnih dvorana za
probu i pripremu predstava, vrt postaje utopijskim njegovanim
javnim prostorom, pretpostavljenim prostorom umjetnosti,
prostorom beskorisne, koliko i iscjeliteljski vrijedne umjetničke
geste (fitomorfnog i antropomorfnog porijekla) unutar isprazno
utilitarne matrice gradskih ulica i zgrada. Za obje je predstave
stoga važno ponoviti razmišljanje Andrewa Benjamina 3 :
Problem reflektiranja prostora – načina na koji prostor
postaje objektom mišljenja ili refleksije – sastoji se u tome
što od svog početka takav čin uključuje nužnu dvostrukost
spacijalnosti. Za prvu spacijalnost možemo reći da uvijek
postoji kao distancija između misli i njezina objekta (…).
Druga spacijalnost nastaje zato što je primarna spacijalnost
reproducirana; sada kao objekt po sebi. Prostorni odmak na
taj se način podvostručuje i to tako da dvostrukost postaje
preduvjetom bilo kakva mišljenja prostora.
Rad s nesigurnim distancijama fotografije ili filmske snimke kao mnogostruke spacijalnosti ujedno je rad s etičkim
poljem virtualna pripadanja i produktivne distanciranosti,
kao i s mogućnošću nekonvencionalna izbora kuta gledanja.
Možda je stoga ples uistinu najpoštenije i najtemeljitije misliti
plesanjem i snimanjem plesa, barem u onoj dimenziji u kojoj
tijelu nije dosta tjelovati; potrebno mu je i višemedijskim
jezicima i promjenjivim metodologijama artikulirati njegova
stalno nova i nova postajanja. Jezik poezije, posebno u pjesmi Bijele tipke (2011) Mary Ruefle4 , veoma se dobro nosi
s preokupacijama Sonje Pregrad:
3
Usp. Art, Mimesis and the Avant-Garde: Aspects of a Philosophy of
Difference, Routledge, London, 1991, str. 42.
4
Pjesmu, preuzetu iz časopisa Poetry (rujan 2011, str. 4), navodim u vlastitu prijevodu.
predstava: Identity MOVE. Project!, Rearranging (and) the self-arranged Naša gola drhtava tijela
moraju biti ponešto udaljena od nas
nedostajemo im
vratite se
vratite se
kažu ona
vratite se
(…)
mislim da se vraćam
osjećam svoja ramena
tu bi mogla sletjeti papiga
iako bi joj drvo vjerojatno više odgovaralo
navodno ne možeš naučiti stablo govoriti
drveće jedino zna reći
proljeće je
ali nije
premda blistavi sumrak
i njima može biti veoma tužan
jeste li opazili?
Fizika naime, sa svim svojim silama i težinama tijela, još
nije koreografija. Imaginiranje srodstva među različitim oblicima materijalnog postojanja, s druge strane, mijenja načine
našeg tjelesnog samopoimanja i samim time začinje umjetničke procese. Sa Sonjom Pregrad putujemo od njezina poroznog
tijela s neizbrojivim socijalnim ticalima, preko bogata pejzaža
tijela jednakovibrantne materije koja je ispunjava i okružuje,
sve do relativne otvorenosti naših (gledateljskih) tijela, koja
joj ponovno vraćaju otposlane valove unutarnjeg i vanjskog
pulsiranja pozornosti. Veoma je teško dokazati da neko tijelo
dopušta ili čak generira takvu vrstu radikalne razmjene, ali
ona nam nakon njezinih izvedaba ostaje u ramenima, zglobovima, očima, koljenima.
Plesom se, dakle, mogu misliti i tuđa tijela.
Pod uvjetom da možemo izdržati talište međusobne površine dodira.
Movements 23 | 24 _ 145
razgovor: Sonja Pregrad
razgovor: Sonja Pregrad < Identity MOVE. Project!, Rearranging (and) the self-arranged, Foto: Tomislav Sporiš >
NATAŠA GOVEDIĆ
NEOVLADANI
POKRET
i nezaklonjeno
su/bivanje
Razgovor sa
Sonjom Pregrad
R
azgovor s plesnom umjetnicom, koreografkinjom,
pedagoginjom i aktivnom promišljateljicom plesne
umjetnosti, Sonjom Pregrad, započinjem izvedbeno,
ponudivši joj da izbere među predmetima koje sam pripremila za nju. To su mala drvena vjetrenjača sa slomljenim
krilom, krumpir, školjka, limun, češer. Vadim ih iz kutije i
slažem pred Sonju.
Predmeti koje si mi donijela kazališni su. Podsjećaju me
na rekvizite za neku predstavu. Najradije bih izabrala sve ili
ne bih izabrala ništa. Imam otpor prema tako zadanoj situaciji i najradije ne bih izabrala ništa jer tako ne radim: radim
iznutra prema van, a ne izvana prema unutra. Potreban mi
je odnos s objektom koji kreće od mene.
¬ Postoji li išta na što želiš odgovoriti, a da to dolazi od
samog objekta, ne iz tebe?
Postoji fizičkost iskustva objekta, njegovo djelovanje na
mene. Dotaknem, onda idem u prostor između mene i tijela i slušam kako tijelo mijenja moj osjet. Slušam objekt i u
vremenu. Tako mi stvar postaje sve materijalnijom, sve prisutnijom. Sama ta situacija susreta s nekim predmetom puna
je iskustva vraćanja nekih drugih materijalnosti i iskustava
koja su prolazila kroz moje tijelo. Tijelo je moj prvi tranzicijski
objekt prema svijetu. Nisam za to da se druge stvari (osobne
povijesti, interpretacije, političke dimenzije) izbrišu; one su
samo ispod te prve relacije. Zanima me od-uzimanje zdravo
za gotovo. Nepodrazumijevanje. Ni tijelo ni relaciju ne možemo do kraja potrošiti. Svi smo svjesni da nam stanice dišu
i da s time radimo na razini plesne imaginacije, na primjer
u tehnikama body-mind centering, ali stvar je u tome da
naše stanice dišu i dok mi to uopće ne imaginiramo. Meni
je uzbudljivo raditi na toj razini. Imati svijest o tome da ne
možemo do kraja ovladati procesima svog tijela, koliko god
ih imaginirali i koliko god ih živjeli. No možda bih od tih tvojih predmeta ipak prvo izabrala krumpir i limun, zato što su
živi. Onda ovu školjku. Onda sasušeni češer. I tek na kraju
vjetrenjaču, na koju se evo odmah nadovezuje i moj mobitel
i čaša vode... Mislim da mi je zanimljivo izgraditi neki struk-
Movements 23 | 24 _ 147
turni odnos između tih predmeta. Niz. Nikako dakle ne bih
izabrala jednu stvar i njome se plesno bavila. Nego bih pokušala s predmetima napraviti razne vrste odnosa. Mislim da
imam dramaturški mozak. Zanima me neovladanost stvarima;
njihova neprovidnost.
¬ Zašto pojedini plesači ne mogu i ne žele ući u zonu neovladana pokreta? Zašto postoje teško premostive podjele
na plesno-plesne i neplesno-plesne predstave?
To je pitanje iz povijesti plesa. Do sedamdesetih i osamdesetih godina prošlog stoljeća bilo je normalno najprije biti
plesačem nekoliko desetljeća, nakon čega, ako baš želiš, postaješ koreografom (tako mi je tata govorio). Susan Leigh
Foster također govori o „iznajmljenom tijelu” plesača, tijelu
koje služi nekoj estetici dugi niz godina. Onda su došle devedesete godine prošlog stoljeća i ples je sebe počeo radikalno propitivati, pri čemu se konceptualni ples počeo polako
odvajati od plesnog plesa, da tako kažem. Na scenu su ušla
neplesna tijela, bilo da je riječ o diletantima ili tijelima koja
komuniciraju neku vrstu ekspertize koja nije stekla znanje
o plesnim tehnikama. Odjednom smo imali na pozornici ne
samo atletska, lirična, šetačka itd. tijela nego i tijela koja je
gotovo nemoguće svrstati u dotad prepoznatljive kategorije. Nakon toga došla je faza, baš sam nedavno pričala s
Nikolinom Pristaš o tome, raspoloživih tijela, točnije tijela
koja moraju biti raspoloživa za najrazličitije estetike pokreta.
Svakako se i dalje čuva komercijalni ideal tijela kao tehnički
discipliniranoga i kompetentnoga, ali jako mnogo škola više
se uopće ne bavi atletizmom tijela, umjesto toga obrazujući
plesača kao autora. Ruku na srce, više se ne možeš baviti suvremenom umjetnošću na pasivan način, bolje rečeno
ne možeš biti plesačicom tako da samo reproduciraš nečiji
tuđi pokret. Moramo raditi svoje izvedbe, a ne koreografirati tuđe. To, međutim, nije put koji svi plesači rado biraju.
Neki žele plesati, ali ne i koreografirati. Uopće ne žele ići u
smjeru plesnog autorstva. Sviđa im se kad ih se podučava
hijerarhijski i imitacijom. Za neovladani pokret potrebna je
analitička, kritička svijest. Zato mi je katkad mnogo lakše
raditi s vizualnim nego s plesnim umjetnicima: kad dođem
na Akademiju likovnih umjetnosti i donesem propoziciju, za
deset minuta studenti pronađu svoju autorsku perspektivu
i odgovore mi na propoziciju. Nikomu ne moram dokazivati
je li to ples ili nije. U svim drugim kontekstima ples se dokazuje ili zahtjevnošću propozicije (pa plesači na nju pristaju
da bi nešto naučili) ili zahtjevnošću tehnike. Rezultat je da
mladi plesači imaju krizu izbora i jako se boje birati između
konceptuale i „čistog plesa”. I moram reći da ih razumijem.
Ako klasični glazbenici imaju pravo čitav život samo svirati
klasični repertoar, zašto isto pravo ne bi imali i plesači?! Zašto
bi svatko morao postati autorom? Nije li to također autoritarna logika? Iz iskustva znam da neki plesači imaju izrazito
148 _ Kretanja 23 | 24
repetitivne impulse, a drugi stalno retrasiraju (re-tracing)
svoj pokret. I oboje je metodološki plodno.
¬ Izvjesno je da se oba pristupa mogu učiti i podučavati,
ali i da postoje akademije koje (sve češće) spajaju različite
plesne epistemologije. Koliko je u nastavi umjetnosti važno
zadržati neku vrstu dijalogičnosti pristupa tijelu? U projektu
TASK, koji si pokrenula, naglasak je upravo na dijalogičnosti
između dviju autorskih ličnosti koje međusobno reflektiraju
i komentiraju stvaralački opus?
Da. TASK je projekt koji je pokrenuo mnogo razina izravne
i neizravne komunikacije, ne uvijek ugodne, jer su neki koreografi mislili da ih se krivo razumije ili aproprira na načine
koji su im strani. Ali na sceni su uvijek otvorena različita autorska doticanja i prožimanja; to nije nešto što možemo do
kraja kontrolirati svojom estetikom ili određenim zadatkom.
Nijedna se metoda ne može doslovno prenijeti na nekoga
drugoga, to je sigurno, uvijek postoji aktivacija metode koja
stvara različite otklone. Nešto preuzimamo, nešto dodajemo,
nešto zanemarujemo. To isto vrijedi i za moj rad s vizualnim
umjetnicima, koji rade posve drukčije od kolega koji su dominantno plesači. Plesači naime uvijek moraju još malo probati.
A vizualni umjetnici moraju doći do svog iskustva i izložiti ga
publici; nema tolike potrebe za usavršavanjem i dorađivanjem. Ili, plesači kažu da su bili „neuspješni”, a vizualci vele
da su „nešto otkrili” i da je „baš bilo zanimljivo”. Shvaćaju
pogrešku na posve različit način. Dijalogičnost je sigurno korisna za obje strane. Kad sam počela učiti ples, morala sam
se jako boriti protiv očekivanja takozvanog normativnog ili
idealnog plesanog tijela, znajući da ta očekivanja nikad neću
ispuniti. Možda zato uvijek radim iz pozicije nepotpunosti.
Nedostižnosti. I interesa za raznolika očekivanja plesnih tijela.
Mislim da je za dijalogičnost kao zajedničku zonu svakako
važna materijalnost iskustva tijela koju svi dijelimo. Tijelo nije
sasvim moje, ne mogu njime ovladati, a pripadam mu. I to
je paradoksalna situacija koja stvara osobitu vrstu dijaloga
između svega onoga što svaki dan znam i ne znam o svojem
tijelu, kao i o tuđim tijelima.
¬
Kako bi definirala suradničko tijelo? I suradnički eros?
Kao radoznalost za multiplicitet onoga što donose i naše
pojavnosti i naša iskustva. Suradničko tijelo uvijek se definira odnosom, zajedničkim dobrom, dodirom, a ne vlastitim
interesom. To znači da proizvodi određenu vrstu povjerenja
u ljude s kojima radim. Pristanka da budem uz njihova iskustva i koncepte i da imam povjerenja da proces zajednički ide
dalje. Nema veze ako ostanem neshvaćenom. U konačnici,
donijet će se odluke s kojima se ne slažem, ali ću ih dopustiti
i prihvatiti. Autorica ili koautorica, dakle, nisam zato što sam
se složila s nekom zajedničkom verzijom, nego zato što sam
pristala na prostor dinamike odnosa među nama na sceni,
razgovor: Sonja Pregrad dok se rad stvarao. Bitno je ne samo akumuliranje nego iznenađenost tuđim odlukama i potrebama. Nije li paradoksalno
proglasiti da je jedno iskustvo mjerodavno, a drugo to nije?
Kao što kažem u izvedbi Vrijednost je dinamički suvišak svake
funkcije: „Koliko vrijedi rad samostalnog umjetnika pitanje je
onoga koliko njegov rad vrijedi unutar zajedništva”. Kad se
pitam kako se opredmećuje neko ja u svom djelovanju, pitam
se što je to što nastaje djelovanjem toga ja. Kad se pitam što
je to što me zanima u djelovanju, definirala bih (ne)materijalnost tijela i plesa, konstituiranje odnosa i proizvodnju suviška.
¬ Stalno se vraćamo na epistemologiju dodira u tvom radu:
dodira s drugim plesačima, dodira s energijskim reakcijama
publike, dodira s različitim objektima na sceni. Komunikacija
dodirom ujedno je polemična u odnosu na neke etablirane
režime gledanja plesa, primjerice baleta, ali i mnoge smjerove suvremenog plesa. Kad bih te zamolila da napraviš
vokabular dodira koji te kontinuirano zanimaju ili osobnu
kartu zona doticaja koje ti se u plesu čine najzanimljivijima,
najproduktivnijima, kako bi izgledao taj anti-vid, taj tijelovid, dodirografija?
Jako mi je dragocjeno da me to pitaš, jer s jedne strane nemam osjećaj da je tema dodira eksplicitno prisutna u
mom radu, ili možda barem dosad nisam toga bila svjesna,
a s druge, osobne, znam da je dodir možda moj najjači kanal
osjeta i komunikacije sa svijetom. Plesati, onako kako to ja
razumijem, naučila sam s pomoću osjeta dodira, pa i onoga
unutarnjeg ili propriocepcije, osjeta unutar vlastita tijela,
kao i onih izvanjskih – kako tijelo dodiruje i biva dodirivano
zrakom, podom, drugim tijelima, energijama i namjerama,
organizacijom prostora, svjetlom, politikom ponašanja koja
uvjetuje smjernice kretanja tim prostorom te stalnom oscilacijom pozornosti između istodobnih unutra/vani, mene/
drugog, pasivnosti/aktivnosti, tj. primanja/davanja, nekog
koji / nečeg što djeluje na mene, dok ja istodobno djelujem
na to drugo. U dodiru je za mene nešto fascinantno u toj
istodobnoj dvojnosti i u tome da stvaranje smisla dodirom
uvijek znači otpuštanje u ono što je otjelovljeno, ali istodobno
i promjenjivo, različito nego stvaranje smisla jezikom, koje
uvijek znači zauzimanje nekog praznog prostora mišlju.
¬ U raznim predstavljanjima svog rada ističeš kako ti je
bitno dovesti u pitanje granicu subjekta i objekta. Ostavljaš
dojam kao da si mnogo više na strani živog objekta, stapanja
s njegovim rubovima i dubinama, nego na strani subjekta i
njegove introspektivne kontrole izvedbene situacije. Možeš
li to komentirati? To te posebno pitam s obzirom na predstavu Masa i forma u kojoj pokrećeš forme i nestaješ u njima…
Ne vjerujem subjektovoj introspektivnoj kontroli. Iako
znam da se ona stalno odvija kao strategija preživljavanja i ljudskog funkcioniranja, ali zanimljivije mi je misliti o
mjestu na kojem se pokazuje da je iluzorna, falična, djelomična, samo jedna strana moguće perspektive situacije...
U umjetničkom procesu u posljednjih sedam godina bavim
se temom istodobne objektnosti i subjektivnosti plesača,
njegova tijela te pokreta tog tijela, odnosno njegova plesa. Mislim da se moj rad nalazi u prostoru između rada s
osjetilnim i rada s racionalnim – katkad tu dihotomiju još
osjećam kao neko trzajno, konfliktno područje, i često to
probavljam radom.
Dragocjeno mi je raditi s kolegama koji su posvećeni promatranju toga kako svijest o otjelovljenosti mijenja proceduru
postojanja te kako je ples u tom svom značenju političan,
poetičan, subverzivan, inovativan. To nije ni jednostavna ni
laka pozicija u današnjem svijetu, veoma je marginalizirana,
što je samorazumljivo u društvu u kojem je tijelo takav prostor manipulacije i eksploatacije da mora biti ispražnjeno da
bi se kontroliralo, pa stoga nestaje ikakva njegova ozbiljnija
topologija kao nekog sučelja za doživljavanje života.
Mi smo kao lude iz tarota.
Tijelo traži veliku količinu smirenosti, nježnosti, osjetljivosti, neželje za sigurnom pozicijom znanja, što su sve dosta
lude pozicije.
Isabelle Schad jedna je od tih kolegica. Zato mi je bilo
iznimno dragocjeno raditi s njom u Masi i formi, jer je ona
netko tko plesu pristupa kao osobnoj političkoj praksi i daje
mu prostor da gradi tijelo rada braneći ga od okvira koji bi
ga srezali. Važno joj je prepustiti se plesu i ponovno u tom
iskustvu vrednovati što je on i što je njegova virtuoznost/
dubina za mene samu.
Objektnost – što su informacije koje dolaze dodirom –
jako teško ću ti ih opisati jezikom jer djeluju sasvim drukčije,
ali one su mi zanimljive, a ne objektivnost. Zanimljivo je kad
tijelo zamislimo kao živi objekt, zamišljam da to na neki način
ekspandira sliku tijela koju imamo, u kojoj onaj dio koji inače
uzimamo zdravo za gotovo (njegova a priori materijalnost)
postaje ogromnim. Da bi se tu ne/spektakularnu ogromnost
moglo podržati, potreban je fini unutrašnji, precizni rad s
osjetom tijela, koji je dovoljno utemeljen da može opaziti
nastajuće i nestajuće slike, situacije, objektnosti i rezonirati s
njima, ali koji se ne iscrpljuje i ne zaustavlja u toj razini, nego
može slušati, prihvatiti, otpustiti, biti u praznini…
¬ Molim te komentiraj ovaj citat Williama Forsythea: „Koreografski objekt nije zamjena za tijelo, već alternativna
lokacija razumijevanja i organiziranja potencijalne akcije”.
Isto tako, komentiraj ovaj autobiografski zapis Deborah Hay
iz 2000. godine: „Ona voli žonglirati. Umjesto s loptama
ili bučicama, vježba s pet ili šest perceptivnih iskustava
odjednom. Loptice joj padaju, ali nema veze. Redatelj bi
trebao znati da joj je draže žonglirati nego hvatati loptice. U
žongliranju si slobodan od znanja što radiš, što opet stvara
Movements 23 | 24 _ 149
osobitu vrstu znatiželje i otvaranja pitanja. Tu osjeća da je
izvedba stvarno živa”.
Meni se čini da je moje razumijevanje plesa kao objekta
slično utoliko što sagledavanje plesa kao objekta pomiče
percepciju prema materijalnosti nematerijalnoga – onim rubovima i dubinama živog objekta koje si spomenula u prošlom pitanju – teksturama osjeta vremena i prostora (pa čak
i značenja), to jest relacija koje se grade plesom kao djelovanjem/bivanjem u tijelu.
Paradoks da je naša percepcija vlastita postojanja uvjetovana postojanjem tijela, a da to postojanje nismo u mogućnosti do kraja pojmiti, u korijenu je onoga tko jesmo. Iako taj
suvišak postojanja stalno izmiče našoj percepciji, sposobni
smo pojmiti/osjetiti da suvišak postoji negdje onkraj našeg
poimanja. U trenutku kad ga postajemo svjesni i time pretvaramo u objekt vlastita razumijevanja, proizvodnja suviška
klizi prema području izvan granice tog razumijevanja. Ta dinamika isklizavanja, kontinuirana diskontinuiteta zanimljiva
mi je kao koreografski princip.
¬ Čitavu si jednu predstavu posvetila problemu nevidljive
i nemjerive vrijednosti, dapače umjetnosti kao višku vrijednosti koji se ne može izraziti ni kategorijama vremena ni kategorijama materijalnog zgrtanja, tj. materijalnog rezultata.
Što za tebe znači svakodnevno živjeti taj suvišak nevidljivog
rada, učenja, održavanja senzora otvorenima? Kako bi opisala akcijski, refleksivni i afektivni pogon svog ekosustava?
Kako njeguješ sebe kao umjetnicu plesa? Možda za sugovornicu nudim i izjavu Deborah Hay, sada iz sedamdesetih
godina prošlog stoljeća: „Nema veze je li to što pokazuješ
istinito ili nije istinito. Samo uzmi u obzir feedback kad to
izvodiš. Tvoja praksa otvara moju praksu”.
Super mi je taj citat Deborah Hay jer me podsjeća na to da
se ono što smatram stvarno važnom informacijom, vrijednom
umjetničkog rada dogodi izvan/mimo/nakon istine, namjere,
znanja, misli; one su tu samo da započnu, da budu opkoljene stvarnostima. Za mene rad nastaje u odnosu. Općenito
me zanima relacija i kako relacija stvara suvišak otvorenog
prostora u odnosu na sebstvo. Zato su mi suradnje bitne, a
jednako tako bitno mi je raditi i solo (i zato mi je bio važan
diplomski studij Solo/ples/autorstvo koji sam završila) jer
raditi solo radove samo znači postaviti tu membranu dodira
između drugog i sebe na drugu frekvenciju (drugi ionako jesu
prisutni – u dvorani, u životu – sve vrijeme).
U posljednje vrijeme posebno su mi zanimljivi radovi/
suradnje koji ekspliciraju svijest o tome kako odnos otvara
sebstvo, kao što su već spomenuta Vrijednost s Marjanom
Krajač, gdje su ona i publika u jednom prostoru, a ja u drugom, posredovanom pozivom putem Skypea, ili rad Rearranging (and) the self-arranged s Nives Sertić, u kojemu se nas
dvije i naši mediji (ples i slika/video) rastvaraju u odnosu nas
150 _ Kretanja 23 | 24
dviju u pokušaju izvođenja nehijerarhijskog i neutilitarnog
odnosa tih dvaju medija.
¬ Koje suradnje smatraš autorski formativnima i zašto?
Smatraš li da je važno imenovati svoje mentore, uzore, učiteljice, niti vodilje, ljude koji su ti pomogli da nađeš svoje
autorske glasove? Čak i ako nisu iz umjetničkog miljea?
Zanimljivo mi je to pitanje, jer, iskreno, dosad nisam imala
potrebu imenovati učitelje i uzore, čak mi je to, naprotiv, bilo
odbojno i obično mi ostaje kao poticajan neki trenutak koji
uključuje osobu, njezin rad, trenutačnu specifičnost konteksta
u kojem se on događa, i to nešto što nastane nadilazi definiciju individualnog autorskog rada. Mislim da sam si time
i zakomplicirala razvoj, jer najčešće ne odlučujem preuzeti
metode, pristupe i estetike koji su mi zanimljivi, nego se vodim nekim intuitivnim opipavanjem prostora koji ju zanima i
tako nalazim strategije. No vidim da se unutar moje prakse
nešto mijenja i mislim da to ima veze s njezinim trajanjem i
perspektivom koja se mijenja – postaje mi jako zanimljivim
pitanje nasljedovanja moje plesne prakse i plesno-stvaralačkih praksa scena kojima pripadam – ovogodišnji festival
Improspekcije2015 bavi se artikulacijom upravo toga i jako
mi je drago da smo uspjeli okupiti brojne aktere scene u
istraživačkom laboratoriju Riba gušter leopard čovjek, koji
facilitiraju moji berlinski kolege Maria F. Scaroni i Peter Pleyer,
u kojem se bavimo praktičnom re/artikulacijom vlastitih i
kolektivnih plesnih korijena – divno mi je da to radimo, kao
napor jedne (mini)zajednice.
I tako nekako ponovo shvaćam koliko me, nakon osnovne
i srednje Škole za suvremeni ples (danas Škole suvremenog
plesa Ane Maletić), oblikovalo školovanje u kojem sam učila
o pokretu ne samo kao o nekoj formi koju moram naučiti
nego, počevši od Labanove analize pokreta, o pokretu kao
nečemu što ima svoje prostorne, vremenske i kvalitativne
parametre. Također i studij na ArtEZ-u1 , s pionirkama američkog postmodernog plesa kao što su Eva Karczag i Mary
O’Donnell (Fulkerson) i obiljem somatskih praksa (kontaktna improvizacija, funkcionalna anatomija, Alexander, chi
gong…) i različitih oblika rada u improvizaciji. Sjećam se
koliko mi je (i opće i plesno) kulturno šokantan bio taj odlazak u Nizozemsku i susret s američkim (i nizozemskim)
postmodernim plesom. Sjećam se i koliko su me pomaknuli
opus ranih radova Jérômea Bela, ali i Extra Dry Emija Greca, koje sam vidjela 1999, na početku svog studija plesa u
Nizozemskoj. Nakon studija i povratka u Hrvatsku mislim da
mi je referentnom točkom postala domaća scena, i plesna
i likovna, odnosno umjetnička, ali i socijalna i politička, te
sam vlastiti rad uvijek (ne/svjesno) upravljala prema njoj,
1
Visoka umjetnička škola u Arnhemu, Enschedeu i Zwolleu (ArtEZ hogeschool voor de kunsten in Arnhem, Enschede en Zwolle).
razgovor: Sonja Pregrad no sve vrijeme održavala sam različite inozemne suradnje
što mi je uvijek otvaralo prostor u odnosu na internaliziran
primarni kontekst mog rada. U tom su mi periodu u Hrvatskoj ključne bile suradnje s Irmom Omerzo, koja me stalnom
suradnjom poduprla u ključnom periodu moga razvoja kao
profesionalne plesačice, te Zrinkom Šimičić Mihanović, koja
mi je prva otvorila prostor razmjene i suradnje nakon mog
povratka sa studija i s kojom surađujem, radi čega sam iznimno sretna i zahvalna, niz godina, do danas, u inicijativi i
festivalu improvizacije Improspekcije, ali i u mnogim drugim
pedagoškim i autorskim projektima.
¬ Feministička umjetnica Sanja Iveković izabrala te za
blisku suradnicu i izvođačicu nekih od svojih ranijih performansa. Kakav je tvoj stav prema feminističkom znanju?
Suradnja sa Sanjom Iveković započela je njezinim pozivom 2009. da izvodim u remakeu njezina performansa iz
1982. Practice Makes a Master prigodom projekta arhiviranja i izlaganja feminizma u umjetnosti re.act.feminism.
Zahvalna sam feminističkom znanju, kao i plesnom znanju
i queer znanju mnogih osoba koje su artikulirale i ustrajale na pozicijama drugima od one dominatne. Na suradnji
sa Sanjom Iveković i njezinu radu zahvalna sam jer su mi
izmjestili percepciju (vlastita) plesačkog i autorskog rada
prema kontekstu vizualne umjetnosti i performansa, prema
lokalnom narativu te umjetnosti i prema bliskom uvidu u fini
i precizni intermedijski formalizam koji odlikuje njezin rad i
koji mi je bio poticajan u odnosu na vlastitu koreografsku
praksu. Nakon toga osjetila sam potrebu definirati vlastiti
rad i odatle odlazak na diplomski studij (MA) u Berlinu, na
kojem sam vježbala istodobnost potrebe da definiram svoj
solo rad i potrebe da ga i dalje razvijam u višestrukim suradničkim odnosima i projektima. Važno mi je bilo otvoriti
se prema novom, berlinskom i europskom polju djelovanja
– odatle razvoj višegodišnje suradnje s kolegom sa studija
Willyjem Pragerom, koji dolazi iz kazališta i s kojim je rad
uvijek međusobno reformuliranje ideja različitim pristupima
i intuicijom. Jednako važno bilo mi je ostati djelatnom u vlastitu lokalnom kontekstu – tu mi je iznimno plodonosno bilo
sudjelovanje u simpoziju Koliko vrijedim Marjane Krajač, koji
je okupio plesnu zajednicu oko pitanja revalorizacije trenutačne situacije u kojoj djelujemo, u kojem sam sudjelovala
izlaganjem iz Berlina putem Skypea; predavanjem kojim sam
imala priliku staviti u kontakt oba konteksta. Važan mi je i
poziv Nicole Hewitt da predajem pokret i performans studentima Odsjeka za animirani film i nove medije na ALU-u
te kontinuitet rada na Improspekcijama. Bavljenje mnogim
i različitim aspektima plesa – autorskim, izvođačkim, pedagoškim, intermedijskim, organizacijskim – daje mi bogatstvo
relacija unutar kojih gradim svoju tehniku, svoju kutiju za
alat, kompleksnu sliku predjela u kojem obitavam.
¬ Trenutačno živiš u Bugarskoj, Njemačkoj i Hrvatskoj,
barem ako je suditi po predstavama koje radiš. Možeš li
komentirati produkcijske razlike u tim kulturnim sredinama
kad je u pitanju rad na plesnoj predstavi? Jesi li se igdje
susrela s istinskim kozmopolitizmom?
Trenutačno smatram Zagreb svojom bazom, a Berlin nekim bližim rođakom kojeg posjećujem često i s kojim provodim vrijeme. Berlin je možda najbliže ideji odnosno praksi
kozmopolitizma, no istodobno je iznimno iscrpljujući, jer kao
umjetnička, ali i društvena scena, postoji kao iznimno prenapučen, tranzitan i time neuzemljen i prekaran. Za produkciju
predstave Serijal za budućnost / Ples u 2043. / Ples u 2044.
u Berlinu smo Willy i ja dobili pet puta više novca nego u
Hrvatskoj, međutim honorar koji smo dobili od projekta bio
je skoro podjednak jer je plesna produkcija u Berlinu toliko
skuplja (od iznajmljivanja prostora, producentskih postotaka
nadalje…). Usto, uz broj umjetnika koji se svake godine natječu za sredstva, šanse su veoma male da nastavimo kontinuirano dobivati novac za rad, a tako je i za većinu plesnih
umjetnika tamo i to čini dugoročniji ozbiljan umjetnički razvoj
težim. Ipak, za rad na novoj predstavi Balkan Dance Reality
Show Fabrik Potsdam i Théâtre de Nîmes izabrali su nas za
koprodukciju, što znači da mimo financiranja državnih tijela
postoje i drugi, dovoljno ozbiljni, modeli potpore razvijanju
rada, koji kod nas ne postoje. U Berlinu se, barem posljednjih
godina, veoma ozbiljno radi na razvoju strategije financiranja
i rasta plesne scene, što kod nas, tragično već godinama i
uz sav trud brojnih hrabrih kolega tijekom 2000-ih, uopće
nije slučaj. Što se tiče Bugarske, ona je opet neka druga vrsta
ogledala, jer je njihov standard osjetno niži (hodajući Sofijom
prvih tjedana osjećala sam se kao razmažena bogatašica), te
je, zbog povijesnih okolnosti, kod njih plesna scena mnogo
manja, pa se u tom ogledalu naša scena čini moćnijom – više
plesnih umjetnika/ca, nešto više mogućnosti prostora za
izvedbu, nešto više aktivnosti, nešto bolje financiranje…, ali
poslijetranzicijski kontekst i uvjeti zapravo su veoma slični.
¬ Kako bi usporedila odnos prema plesu na Akademiji
likovnih umjetnosti u Zagrebu, smjer novih medija, s plesnom edukcijom koji si prošla u Berlinu i Arnhemu? Kako
bi usporedila pedagoške metode?
U Arnhemu je ples bio medij koji se propitivao iznutra,
učeći plesati učili smo disati, stajati, promatrati vrijeme i prostor, oblike (unutar) svog tijela, pjevati i još mnoštvo stvari
kojima smo gradili i definirali teritorij svojeg bivanja plesačima. U Berlinu, ples kao medij propitivao se izvana, u odnosu
prema teoriji, pisanju i drugim medijskim praksama iz kojih
su dolazili studenti i profesori. Na ALU-u svoje predavanje
na radionicama pokreta i izvedbe vidim kao jednu od materijalnosti/medija rada koju studenti upoznaju (utemeljenu
u tijelu i vremenu nastajanja – suprotno od umjetnosti koja
Movements 23 | 24 _ 151
152 _ Kretanja 23 | 24
razgovor: Sonja Pregrad je objektna), ili kao referentno polje naspram kojeg studenti
vizualnih umjetnosti mogu odrediti svoju.
¬
Jesi li idealistica?
Ja sam tijelo-istica. I odnos-istica.
¬ Molim te opis jedne plesne predstave koja te se u posljednje vrijeme iznimno dojmila i razloge zašto je prisno
nosiš sa sobom, u svom privatnom rezervoaru inspiracije?
Jedna od mentorica tijekom diplomskog studija bila mi
je Jeanine Durning, čiji je solo inging prikazan i u Zagrebu
na festivalu Soundbodies prošle godine. Jeanine Durning
počinje izvedbu hodajući prostorom i vidljivo dopuštajući
stvaran susret s posjetiteljima koji ulaze u prostor u kojem
su stolice nasumce smještene. U prostoru je i stol s hrpom
knjiga i kamerom postavljenom na njima. U jednom trenutku
Jeanine Durning sjeda za stol, pali kameru i počinje svoju
praksu neprestana govorenja – izgovarajući jednu neprekinutu bujicu rečenica od početka do kraja izvedbe. Govor u
konceptualnom zadatku njegova perpetuiranja i usporedno
u materijalnoj nemogućnosti tog zadatka postaje otjelovljenim čudovištem, prostorom diskontinuirana kontinuiteta,
susreta, sudara, provalija, oblikovanja sebstva mimo sebe.
On postaje plesom tijela koje proizvodi govor, koje isklizava
mimo govora i proizvodi suvišak, biva uhvaćeno u govor,
preklapa se s njime, kasni, bježi, posrće, dašće, plače. Govor
govori nama i govori sebi. Govor guta sam sebe i stvara taj
prostor suviška koji je iznimno uzbudljiv, osjetilan i osjetan.
Izvedba završava odlukom o prestanku govorenja i dugim
trenutkom šutnje, u kojemu se posljedica i rezonancija siline
akcije sliježu u tišinu i percepciju svega što je dotad bilo promijenjeno dominacijom govora – vremena, prostora, tijela u
njemu i njihovih odnosa. Rad Jeanine Durning i njezin solo
inging duboko su odjeknuli u meni zbog razine s koje se bave
tijelom koje je istodobno subjektivno, plesačko i političko i
plesom kao aktivnošću takva/tog tijela te radi implikacija
na iskustvo, sudjelovanje i ulogu publike koju takav/taj rad
hrabro predlaže.
¬ Finalno, na umjetničkoj sceni tijekom čitavog dvadesetog stoljeća, doslovce od Prvog svjetskog rata nadalje,
djeluje vrlo jaki tabu užitka. Inzistira se na što brutalnijoj
prezentnosti boli, povrede, gnjeva, nemoći, agresije. I to je,
dakako, legitimno, ali cijeli jedan spektar naše senzorike
ostaje neistražen i zanemaren. Kakav je tvoj stav prema
matrici uživalačkog tijela i tijela koje se ne boji znanja koje
donosi užitak?
Užitak i zanos nisu mi tabu. Mislim da je užitak političan i
važan. Realiziram ga materijalnošću iskustva koje, doduše, ne
viče i ne poziva na neprestanu revoluciju, ali zato uživa raditi
s drugim tijelima. Recimo s Willyjem Pragerom i njegovom
produktivnom površnošću, s našim zajedničkim reformuliranjem i međusobnom kontaminacijom, koje dovode do
toga da se ne možemo do kraja shvatiti, niti možemo shvatiti
užitak igre ili izvedbe.
¬ Opisala bih te kao iznimno senzualnu umjetnicu. Što je
za tebe senzualnost na sceni?
Možda nešto što ima veze sa submisivnošću, s puštanjem
da mi se razni impulsi dogode, s prepuštanjem interakciji.
Ako to usporedim s tijelima koja sve mogu, činjenica je da
se tim supersposobnim tijelima ništa neočekivano prisno,
dakle ništa senzualno ne može dogoditi. Mnoge strastvene
izvedbe u osamdesetim i devedesetim godinama meni su bile
izvanjske, plastične, strogo kontrolirane, instrumentalizirane
i samim time politički veoma problematične. U umjetnosti
su mi važni i užitak i drskost. Oni su veoma izravni i prema
publici, otvaraju nas prema drugima. Utoliko je senzualnost
možda ipak nešto više od submisivnosti – zainteresiranost da
budemo s drugima na nezaklonjeni način.
Nataša Govedić doktorirala je komparativnu književnost
i teatrologiju. Autorica je dvanaest knjiga iz užega područja
kazališne teorije, jedna je od osnivačica kulturno-društvenoga časopisa Zarez, glavna urednica feminističkoga časopisa
Treća te stalna kazališna kritičarka Novoga lista. Stalno je
zaposlena kao docentica na Akademiji dramske umjetnosti
u Zagrebu. Suosnivačica je izvedbenog kolektiva Institut za
katastrofu i kaos. Piše i poeziju i knjige za djecu. Aktivna je i
kao dramaturginja te izvođačica na nezavisnoj sceni.
Movements 23 | 24 _ 153
performance: Identity MOVE.
Project!, Rearranging (and) the
self-arranged
performance: Identity MOVE. Project!, Rearranging (and) the self-arranged < Identity MOVE. Project!, Rearranging (and) the self-arranged, Photo: Tomislav Sporiš >
NATAŠA GOVEDIĆ
Thinking Dancing
through Dancing:
on Sonja Pregrad’s
performances
All theory is against the freedom of the will;
all experience for it.
Samuel Johnson
E
xploration of movement in the choreography
and dancing of Sonja Pregrad is tied in various
ways to a consistent empirical mapping of the
improvisational, i.e., background or laterally scripted
choreographic impulse. Pregrad is one of the founders
of the improvisational festival Improspections, as well as
a co-founder of the international project TASK (wherein
choreographers are invited to share and respond to methodological principles of dance making). She has authored
and co-authored a number of projects, shaping her own
mode of corporeal awareness while taking into account
specific social coordinates of in-betweenness as a relation
that emerges in the space between the dancing body and
the audience body or at their point of contact. As a dance
artist, she regularly participates in the so-called open
process dance projects, as seen in her collaborations with
Isabelle Schad, Zrinka Šimičić, Zrinka Užbinec, Marjana
Krajač, Johanna Chemnitz, Leja Jurišić, Nives Sertić, Irma
Omerzo, Sanja Iveković, Pavle Heidler, Silvia Marchig etc.
But perhaps the most accurate way of describing Sonja
Pregrad would be to call her our most prominent practitioner of the “dance impulse entelechy” or thinking about
dance through dance, as this specific approach is called by
Jean A. Schweizer in her book The New Choreography of
Consciousness (2011). Unlike the numerous positivist and
constructivist approaches to dance, this particular artistic
method does not support the idea that a clearly defined
and comprehensive dance technique must necessarily be
prioritized before and beyond numerous “unstructured”
outbursts or “overabundant” embodiments, given that
the body inevitably operates independently of social
and choreographic forms that shape it. Sonja Pregrad is
interested precisely in that less visible, less declarative
hyperawareness of bodily perception and proprioception
of reflected and perpetually rearticulated body; she is
interested in how to be a displayed, considered and present
body, which thinks its kinetics, its affective core and its
ideological tensions.
Movements 23 | 24 _ 155
performance: Identity MOVE. Project!, Rearranging (and) the self-arranged
The ambitiousness of such a body project can be
compared to the Jean-Luc Nancy’s text Corpus (2008),
in which the body exists only through the series of
resistances to its “obviousness” and “functionality”. It
is a body that reads itself and its environment simultaneously, while also writing down the relational coordinates
of remembered and presently established encountership,
or, in other words, it is a very alert and eloquent body.
Let me say that at this particular point in dance history,
many dancers are attempting to follow the aforementioned trend of the tyranny of impulse, or rather, they are
trying to open the audience’s gaze to a sort of actualized
dancing self-awareness, but in doing so, they often forget
about the reflexivity of the dance sequence and fall
prey to self-mannerisms that exist (solely) for their own
sake and that avoid both the conceptual elaboration and
the contemplation of poetic and political issues that arise
from displaying a dancing body.
In this sense, Sonja Pregrad is a very influential exception to the rule – throughout her long dance career, she
has demonstrated, with great care, that body on its own
isn’t immune to layers of repetition or to the various
dimensions of predictability, fatigue, redundancy, pain,
heaviness, platitudes, citations, memories, overlearned
and favoured gestures – but the point is to not censor or
Photoshop them. Rather, we should be fully aware of
them, in almost Brechtian terms of being able to recognize the convention so that we can put it under a microscope and thus free it of mechanical emptiness of repetition. Pregrad operates as an activist against various types
of automatised performance. What is more, the intensity
of the way she thinks the dance through dancing consciously runs counter to the supposedly naïve spontaneity
of free association through dance. The constant probing
and favouring of the corporeal impulse in many superficial improvisational performances I witnessed never has
the time to effect its own maturation, nor does it allow
for changes in ingrained dance mannerisms, which often
pour into or out of the body in the same way as musical
exercises based on free association of tonal modulation
or as a spontaneous exercise in abstract painting, which
only serves as a warm up for the painter. I am trying to
say that spontaneity in improvisational techniques is
often questionable in terms of quality: reflecting on this
spontaneity is far more important, and it is precisely in
this regard that Sonja Pregrad is a uniquely focused and
original performer on the Croatian independent scene.
In my view, Pregrad’s performances raise a very
important issue, closely tied to the philosophical contemplation of free will. Paradoxically, the overabundance
of spontaneously deciding on one’s movements during
156 _ Kretanja 23 | 24
a performative acceleration of awareness also requires
heightened self-awareness when trying out untested
matrices of body expression, but also a greater analytical willingness to apply self-control, self-correction and
self-monitoring. In other words, a dancer like Sonja
Pregrad practices the plurality of kinetic and analytic
awareness, including numerous contradictions or productive collisions of freedom and habit, in which she is
always ready to work on the actualization of movement
and on alternatives to the selected sequence of movement. In her show Form and Mass (2014), choreographed
by Isabelle Schad, Sonja Pregrad agrees to be a dancing
body that is rolled around the stage amongst a pile of
black bags; she agrees to turn herself into an amorphous
dark mass, “no head or tail visible”, or perhaps only the
tail and limbs at odd angles. The body is intertwined with
non-living matter to such a degree that we do not know
where the bulk of this multifold object begins or ends,
nor can we make out behind which geometric plane of
“living objects” lurks its invisible mover – the human
subject. The ecology of such compression and interfusion
between living and non-living matter creates a certain
eco-communality of performance, which no longer
features the hierarchy of aliveness. Similarly, there is no
classic authorship over the shared kinetic energy.
In her performances, Pregrad explicitly builds on
the phenomenological work of Merleau-Ponty, namely
on the respect for the lived and not just aesthetically
trained and academically disciplined dancing body, but
her dance-theatre work is also heavily marked by postmodernist and feminist theory. More specifically, her
work is deeply suspicious of the idea that value or virtue
and their bodily manifestations can ever be restrained by
a definitive or closed description and it reveals a strong
critical awareness of playing against any fixed parameters
of the properly placed female body on the dance stage,
especially parameters whose archistructure relies on the
ideologies of docile, weightless ballet bodies. As Janet
Wolff1 warns, a dance body that resists the normativity
of ballet may easily become subject to interpretations that
imply ostensibly “grotesque” or “carnivalesque” nature of
gender performance, but in reality, they are just another
proof of the degree to which the physicality is the site
of the strongest, cruellest social control, which does not
tolerate any transgressions of prescribed appearance
and behaviour. Conversely, the bodily knowledge of
1
See text “Reinstating Corporeality: Feminism and the Body Politic”, from Meaning in Motion: New Cultural Studies of Dance edited
by Jane C. Desmond, Duke University Press, Durham, 1997, pgs.
86-87.
performance: Identity MOVE. Project!, Rearranging (and) the self-arranged the female performers willing to raise the questions of
“gender drama” of displayed physis lies at the very core
of contemporary dance, so much so that it is integral to
seminal performances by witches such as Isadora Duncan, Mary Wigman or Martha Graham. In Croatia, the
tradition of female dance solo is rife with interruptions
and isolated performances – in other words, it has been
difficult to establish despite being one of prerequisites for
artistic expression. This is why the work of Sonja Pregrad
also has a pedagogical dimension of granting a licence
to explore to her colleagues and of enduring the dance
epistemology that knows it doesn’t know everything that
a body can play, produce, suppress and summon, but
which at least accepts the constant process of learning
by listening to its own corpus.
Singling out individual performances from Sonja
Pregrad’s opus is a thankless task, because their stylistic
and ideological features are very rich and diverse, but
for this occasion, I would like to take a closer look at
the show Identity MOVE. Project!, Rearranging (and) the
Self-Arranged, which Sonja Pregrad performed at the
PLATFORMA HR festival in the spring of 2015, in collaboration with the visual artist Nives Sertić.
As the performance begins, the two artists greet the
audience while casually leaning against the entrance to
the music and performance club Močvara. Speaking in
laconic tones, they inform us that we are about to see a
show designed to look at the issues of identity, but “the
word i-de-n-ti-ty sounds terribly uncomfortable in one’s
mouth and it is difficult to pronounce” (Pregrad does this
with a visible effort, twisting her mouth humorously),
and they also confide that identity actually was the subject of their recent residency in Prague, which serves as
the basis for the performance we are about to see. Both
are wearing shorts and casual summer clothes.
Once we are inside the darkened, enclosed space, the
performance of describing open spaces begins. As Pregrad
gazes at the audience and a mass of wires from projection equipment, strewn across the stage floor among
the viewers, she says in curatorial tones that before her
she can see: “Sky. Clouds. Sun rising and setting. Wind.”
Nives Sertić asks her: “Do you think I’m the wind?” and
receives a “yes” in reply. Sertić continues: “But you didn’t
talk about nature the last time. And – in truth – this (she
points to the dust she just swept up) is the closest you can
get to nature in theatre anyway. Theatre cannot play host
to nature. Last time, you opened the show by dancing.”
At this point, a large projection screen looming over
the left side of the stage shows a photo of a meadow.
Sertić once again destabilizes what we see by asking the
audience: “Do I reflect the nature when I record it, or
does it reflect me?” Next she tells us that “each individual
seed is the tiniest self-organized microcosm”, but also
that she, Nives Sertić, “doesn’t feel like the wind, nor
do I understand the logic of the wind”. Sonja Pregrad
responds that this place where we are is “still nature,
although it is theatre at the same time”. She presents
her evidence by slowly descending on all fours, into the
natural position of the animal body, swinging her long
ponytail around with increasing force, breathing heavily,
snorting, and in the end performing a series of falls to
her hips and backside, her bare skin scratching the floor
loudly (emphasis on the weight and mass of the body
and the typically sensual floorwork reminiscent of Doris
Humphrey are staples of Sonja Pregrad’s choreographic
work). Audience responses range from amused giggling to
several professional dancers in the auditorium exchanging
uneasy comments about a female body daring to indulge
in deliberate, pronounced, burlesque, playful, unpretentious, witty awkwardness. Pregrad does not let this distract
her; she continues her series of falls and the sounds of
skin encountering the floor and gravity (smack – smack,
smack – smack...) seem to grow into an almost musical
manifesto, gaining in intensity with each new repetition.
Then the performer addresses us.
Pregrad: How to subvert the mechanisms of representation? We are dressed as tourists. We staged ourselves as fake tourists in fake nature. We took fake tourist
photos, with fake enthusiasm and fake delight, in the fake
nature of the Prague Botanical Garden. Then we gave fake
attention to all that light and flowers.
Sertić: And then everything became truly beautiful.
This instance of punching through the ironic distance
that marks the first part of the play with the confession
that the Botanical Garden in Prague raises “the largest butterflies in the world”, followed by a series of photographs
of Sonja Pregrad’s playful, but also highly aestheticised
body against the background of greenery, creates a very
lyrical zone, where a photo of lips biting on a twig, or a
knee resting on intertwined leaves of grass, or ivy wilfully
making its way across the glasshouse roof establish a
space that cannot be appropriated by naming it, because
its bearings are not contextually located – rather, they are
determined by the authorial perspective of mutual viewing
between the creators of the performance. At this point
in the performance, the outer space is transformed into
visual metaphors of the inner landscape, additionally
evoked through the use of a large mirror, held by Pregrad
as she searches for and finds Nives Sertić in the actual
theatre space, but also as she intervenes in the photo-
Movements 23 | 24 _ 157
performance: Identity MOVE. Project!, Rearranging (and) the self-arranged
graphic material reproduced on the stage. These mirrorings of the scenery obliterate divisions between real and
virtual bodies, between natural and artificial spaces. The
evocative quality of the photographs and juxtaposition of
uninhabited garden architecture with the organic spaces
of lush garden greenery within the enclosed theatre box
gives rise to exuberant growth of hybrids of human and
plant world that follow each other in quick succession.
This means that the photographic signature of the show
does not prioritize nature over culture or culture over
nature; probably the most accurate way of describing it
is to say that it searches for specific expressive languages
of matter mobilized in a twofold, two-way manner.
As in many other performances by Sonja Pregrad, the
vibrancy of the matter (here: nature) surpasses the status
of the object, asking us to what degree each material
instance also serves as a potential actant or protoactant,
source or initiator of someone else’s action, as proposed
by Bruno Latour in his Politics of Nature (2004). If the
matter conditions and modifies our perception, whether
we are capable of affirming its liveness becomes an important political question. Is every atom simultaneously a
processual performance? To whom do we owe the idea of
nature as passive otherness in the predominantly human
world? And what exactly does it mean to preserve the
images of some past viewing of nature in the context
of the living ‘human garden’, otherwise called theatre?
The show concludes with the video recording of the two
performers entering the technological environment of a
theatre building in Prague, which, when referenced on the
site of the Zagreb performance, becomes a commentary
on the double displacement of the performers.
So, is theatre their natural or social environment?
And is there a parallel between the intensified care for
organisms within the botanical and the theatrical setting?
Does the culturally ‘intact’ environment, ‘unviolated’ by
viewing and social interactions, even exist? What do we
gain by claiming that art is more artificial than nature? Art
is assuredly composed of the same matter as the weeds at
the entrance of the theatre, and so are the most sophisticated temple walls, cacti or the fragile, architecturally
and geometrically intricate beehives. In other words,
nature is a model builder and mimetist. Is the arguably
high degree of matter’s derivativeness proof of its unnaturalness? Is the processed tree, called the stage, divorced
from the essential qualities of its arboreal origins? Did
our bodies lose touch with the natural instincts through
millennia-long processes of cultural adaptation or do they
continue to manifest them perfectly on a daily basis –
through eating, urinating, running, having sex etc.?
Is the dancing body more artificial than a lived body?
158 _ Kretanja 23 | 24
Or is it wilder, freer, more immediate t han t he
mechanics of existence?
Identity MOVE. Project!, Rearranging (and) the Self-Arranged casts doubt on the possibility of an unambiguous
answer to the above questions. Viewing the matter, viewing the photographs of the matter, viewing the human
body: these are not just practices of moving the matter,
but also of reversing the superficial and cursory time’s
arrow, making us aware of the naturalness of earnest
gaze, and of our own reflexive instinct. In the words of
dance artist and pedagogue Bonnie Bainbridge Cohen2 ,
commenting on the photographs used to illustrate various affective states as choreographic documents: a photograph is a material trace of being that by necessity
poses a number of questions. To quote from Cohen’s
book on the potentiality of photographs: does a photograph emanate its meaning towards us? Or does it draw
us into itself? Does it cross over the boundaries of its
presentation or does it remain inside its set frame? Is it
neutral, active or passive? Does it record an experience
of loss? Or an experience of gain? What are the emotions
that charge it? Through which organs do the emotions
recorded by the body in the picture travel? How does
the energy between the depicted body and space flow?
Can we respond to the photographed body with a live
body? Interestingly, the interactional co-awareness of
suspended viewing (photograph) and dynamic viewing
(improvisational performance) proposed by Bainbridge
Cohen can be applied to Nives Sertić and Sonja Pregrad’s
performance only partially, because the compositional
principle of the way they record and display bodies in
the space hides and/or fragments the integrity of the
body and space, thus turning the viewing into a riddle
of sorts, instead of a solution to the riddle. In other
words, only the performers see the broader picture of
their Prague experience, whereas the audience’s gaze is
heavily controlled through various reductions and cuts
in perspective.
Pregrad uses similar dramaturgy of phantom body
or body mediated through film projection, markedly
remote yet directly summoned into the space of live
performance by way of camera, in her piece Value is a
Dynamic Surplus of Any Function (2014), created in tandem with Marjana Krajač. A debate on how many hours
of studying, practicing, thinking, travelling, additional
training, reading, writing and discussing are required for
being a dancer is once again an ironic commentary on
2
Quoted from Sensing, Feeling, Action: The Experimental
Anatomy of Body-Mind Centering, Contact Editions, Northampton,
1993, p. 40.
performance: Identity MOVE. Project!, Rearranging (and) the self-arranged her social marginalization, but also an implicit praise of
artistic pursuit, whose surpluses quite certainly cannot
be expressed in mathematical or economic parameters.
The audience shares the space with the absent, filmed
and Skype-mediated body of Sonja Pregrad, and the performance briefly features the images of the garden in the
front yard of the Academy of Fine Arts in Zagreb, and
the School of Ballet and Dance in Zagorska Street, where
Pregard has her temporary studio.
Here again the garden motif appears to signal the
autonomy of artistic space, guarded to the point of isolation, but also undeniably essential to dance production.
In the context of Croatian public scene, chronically devoid
of rehearsal spaces for dance shows, garden becomes a
utopian, well-kept public space, a presumed space for
art, a space for artistic gesture (of phytomorphic and
anthropomorphic origin) that is as useless as it is restorative, situated as it is in the emptily utilitarian matrix of
city streets and buildings. Andrew Benjamin’s thinking
applies to both shows3 :
The problem of reflecting on space – its becoming
an object of either thought or reflection – is, that from
its inception, such an act will have to involve a twofold
spacing. The first spacing is the one that can always be
said to exist between thought and its object (…). The second emerges because this primary spacing is reproduced;
though now as the object itself. Spacing would seem
to have been doubled; moreover this doubling would
then have to function as a precondition for any attempt
to think space.
languages and mutable methodologies to articulate each
new becoming it experiences. The language of poetry,
especially in the poem White Buttons (2011) by Mary
Ruefle4 , addresses Sonja Pregrad’s preoccupations very
well indeed:
Our naked shivering bodies
must be at some distance
missing us come back
come back they cry
come home
(…)
I think I am coming back
I feel shoulders
where a parrot could land
though a tree would be
as good a place as any
You cannot teach a tree to talk
Trees can say it is spring
but not though bright sunlight
can also be very sad
have you noticed?
Working with uncertain/precarious distances of photographs or video recordings as multifold spacing also
means working with the ethical field of virtual belonging and productive distance, and with the possibility of
choosing an unconventional viewpoint. For that reason,
maybe the most honest and thorough way of thinking
dance is through dancing and recording dance, at least
in that dimension in which it is not enough for a body
to merely be bodying; a body also needs multimedia
For all its reliance on force and mass, physics still does
not count as choreography. Imagining kinship between
different forms of material existence, on the other hand,
changes the way we understand our bodies and thus
initiates artistic processes. With Sonja Pregrad, we travel
from her porous body, with its countless social antennae, across a rich corporeal landscape of vibrant matter
that fills and surrounds her, all the way to the relative
openness of our own (viewing) bodies, which receive her
waves of inner and outer pulsing of attention and then
send them back to her. Proving that a body may allow or
even generate such form of radical exchange is exceedingly difficult, and yet, after Pregrad’s performances it
remains in our shoulders, joints, eyes, knees.
So, it is possible to t hink ot her people’s bodies
through dance.
As long as we can endure the melting point of mutual
touch.
3
See Art, Mimesis and the Avant-Garde: Aspects of a Philosophy
of Difference, Routledge, London, 1991, p. 42.
4
Poetry (September 2011, p. 4).
Movements 23 | 24 _ 159
interview: Sonja Pregrad
interview: Sonja Pregrad < Identity MOVE. Project!, Rearranging (and) the self-arranged, Photo: Tomislav Sporiš >
NATAŠA GOVEDIĆ
UNMASTERED
MOVEMENT
and Unsheltered
Co/Being
An interview with
Sonja Pregrad
I
start the interview with dance artist, choreographer, dance educator and the dedicated dance
thinker Sonja Pregrad performatively, by inviting
her to choose among the objects I brought for her:
a small wooden windmill with a broken sail, potato,
shell, lemon, pine cone. I take them out of the box
and place them in front of Sonja.
You’ve brought me theatrical objects. They remind
me of stage props. I would either choose all or none
at all. I tend to resist such prearranged situations so I
would prefer to choose none, because that’s not how I
do things: I work from the inside out, not the other way
around. I need to have a relationship with an object that
originates within me.
¬ Is there anything to which you want to respond
because it comes from the object itself, and not you?
There is physicality to experiencing an object and its
effect on me. I touch it, and then I go to a space between
me and the body and I listen as the body changes my
senses. I also listen to the object in time. That way, the
item becomes increasingly material to me, increasingly
present. The situation of encountering any object is rich
with the experience of giving back other materialities and
experiences that have passed through my body. Body is
my first transitional object towards the world. I’m not in
favour of erasing other issues (personal histories, interpretations, political dimensions); it’s just that they are
underneath this first relation. I’m interested in un-taking
for granted. In the absence of implicitness. Neither the
body nor the relation can ever be fully used up. We are
all aware that our cells breathe and that this is something
we work with when imagining dance, for example in
body-mind centering techniques, but the thing is, our
cells also breathe when we don’t imagine it. I find it
exciting to work on that level. To maintain awareness of
the fact that we can never fully master the processes of
our bodies, no matter how much we imagine them or
Movements 23 | 24 _ 161
how much we live them. From the objects you brought,
potato and lemon would probably be my first choices,
because they are alive. Then the shell. Then the dried-out
pine cone. Only then would I choose the windmill, with
my mobile phone and the glass of water being the next
logical choices… I think I’m interested in building some
kind of a structural relation between these objects. A
sequence. So, under no circumstances would I single out
just one thing for dance treatment. I would try to create
various kinds of relationships with the objects. I think I
have the brain of a dramaturge. I’m interested in things
that have not been mastered; in their opacity.
¬ Why do some dancers lack the ability or willingness to enter the zone of unmastered movement? Why
are there almost irreconcilable divisions between
dance/dance and non-dance/dance shows?
That question is closely tied to the history of dance.
Before the 1970s and 1980s, the usual thing to do was
to work as a dancer for several decades, after which, if
you really wanted, you could become a choreographer
(at least that’s what my dad used to tell me). Susan Leigh
Foster speaks of the “rented body” of the dancer, a body
that spends many years serving a certain aesthetic. Then,
in the 1990s, the dance started to radically question itself,
and the conceptual dance slowly started to distance itself
from the dance dance, so to speak. Non-dancing bodies
started appearing on the stage, bodies of dilettantes or
bodies that conveyed some sort of expertise that did not
arise from studying dance techniques. Suddenly, the stage
was occupied not just by athletic, lyrical, pedestrian etc.
bodies, but also by bodies almost impossible to place
into previously known categories. This was followed
by the phase of – Nikolina Pristaš and I recently had
a conversation about that – available bodies, or more
precisely, bodies that had to be at the disposal of all
kinds of movement aesthetics. Certainly the commercial
ideal of a technically disciplined and competent body
has been preserved, but there are many schools that no
longer focus on the athleticism of the body. Instead, they
train dancers to be authors. Truth be told, one can no
longer do contemporary dance passively, or rather, you
can’t be a dancer if you just reproduce someone else’s
movement. We have to do our own performances, not
choreograph those of other people. This, however, is
not the path that all dancers like to take. Some want to
dance without delving into choreography. They are not
even remotely interested in being dance authors. They
like being taught hierarchically, through imitation. To do
unmastered movement, you need the analytical, critical
awareness. This is why I sometimes find it much easier
162 _ Kretanja 23 | 24
to work with the visual artists instead of dancers: when
I go to the Academy of Fine Arts to propose a task, the
students find their authorial perspective and respond to
my task in a matter of minutes. I don’t have to convince
anyone of whether the task qualifies as dance or not. In
all other contexts, you prove that something is a dance
either by proposing a challenging task (that the dancers
accept in order to learn something) or by proposing a
challenging technique. Consequently, young dancers
suffer from the crisis of choice and they are terrified of
having to choose between conceptual dance and “pure
dance”. And I have to admit I understand them. If classical
musicians are free to play nothing but the classical repertoire their whole life, why shouldn’t dancers be entitled
to the same?! Why should everyone be an author? Isn’t
that also an authoritarian stance? I know from experience
that some dancers have strongly repetitive impulses,
while others are constantly re-tracing their movement.
Both can be methodologically fertile.
¬ There’s no doubt that both approaches can be
learned and taught, but also that there are academies that (increasingly) combine different dance
epistemologies. In teaching art, how important is it to
maintain some sort of dialogicity in approaching the
body? In the TASK project, which you initiated, the
emphasis rests squarely on the dialogicity between
the two authors, who mutually reflect and comment
on the creative work?
Yes. TASK is a project that resulted in many levels of
direct and indirect communication, not always pleasant,
because some choreographers thought that they were
misunderstood or appropriated in ways that were foreign
to them. But there are always different authorial contiguities and interfusions that open on the stage; it’s not
something we can fully control through our aesthetics or
an assigned task. No method can be literally transferred
to someone else, that’s for sure; the way the method is
transferred will create different deviations. Some things
we adopt, some things we add or ignore. The same goes
for my collaborations with visual artists, who operate
quite differently from my colleagues, most of whom are
dancers. You see, the dancers always feel compelled to
rehearse a little bit longer, whereas visual artists feel compelled to take hold of their own experience and display
it for the audience; they don’t feel such pressing need
to perfect and revise. Or, dancers say that they “failed”,
while visual artists talk of “discovering something” and of
having “a really interesting time”. They perceive mistakes
in a completely different way. Dialogicity is undoubtedly
useful for both sides. When I first started studying dance,
interview: Sonja Pregrad I had to push really hard against the expectations of the
so-called normative or ideal dancing body, because I knew
that I would never be able to fulfil those expectations.
Maybe that’s why I always work from the position of
incompleteness. Of unattainability. Of interest in diverse
expectations placed on dancing bodies. I think that materiality of body experience that we all share is certainly
important for dialogicity as the shared zone. This body
is not wholly mine, I can’t master it, but I belong to it.
And that is a paradoxical situation that creates a special
sort of dialogue between all the things that I know or
don’t know about my own and other people’s bodies
on a daily basis.
¬ How would you define a collaborative body? And
collaborative eros?
As inquisitiveness about the multiplicity of everything
that our appearances and our experiences bring us. A
collaborative body is always defined by relationship,
common good, touch, never by self-interest. It produces a certain kind of trust in the people I work with, a
willingness to accept their experiences and concepts and
to trust that the process will go on as something we all
share. It doesn’t matter if I remain misunderstood. In the
final count, there will be decisions I will disagree with,
but I will allow and accept them. In other words, I’m not
an author or co-author because I agreed to some shared
version, but because I agreed to accept a space of dynamic
relationship between us on the stage, as the work was
being created. It’s not just the accumulation that matters;
being surprised by other people’s decisions and needs
also plays a part. Wouldn’t it be paradoxical to proclaim
one experience as authoritative and not the other? As
I say in performance Value is a Dynamic Surplus of Any
Function: “The question of how much the work of an
independent artist is worth is the question of how much
his or her work is worth within communality.” When I
wonder how a “self” is being reified through its action,
I’m wondering what it is that is created through the
action of that self. And when I ask myself what it is that
interests me in taking action, the (im)materiality of body
and dance, constitution of relationships and production
of surplus are first things that come to mind.
¬ We keep coming back to the epistemology of touch
in your work: touching the other dancers, touching the energy responses of the audience, touching
different objects on the stage. Communicating by
touch is also a polemic with some well-established
regimes of viewing dance, such as ballet or even many
contemporary dance movements. If I asked you to
make an index of the kinds of touch that continue
to hold your interest or a personal map of points of
contact that you find most interesting and productive
in dance, what would this antimap, this bodymap,
this tactilography look like?
That’s a wonderful question, because on one hand, I
don’t feel that the subject of touch is explicitly present
in my work, or maybe I just haven’t noticed it so far, and
on the other hand and from a more personal standpoint,
I know that touch is maybe my strongest channel of
sensing the world and communicating with it. I learned
to dance, as I understand it, through the sense of touch,
including the senses within my body, i.e., proprioception,
and through the outer senses – how the body touches and
is being touched by air, floor, other bodies, energies and
intentions, by the layout of the space, lighting, politics
of behaviour dictating the guidelines of moving through
that space, constant oscillations of focus between inside/
out, self/others, passivity/activity or rather, receiving/giving, someone/something affecting me while I affect that
other thing/person at the same time. I find something
quite fascinating in this simultaneous duality of touch and
in the fact that creating meaning through touch always
implies a release into that which is being embodied and
mutable at the same time. It’s different from creating
meaning through language, which always implies the
occupation of some empty space with thought.
¬ In various presentations of your work, you point
out how important it is to you to question the boundary between subject and object. You seem to prefer
the living object and merging with its edges and
depths to the subject and its introspective control
of performative situation. Can you comment on that?
I am thinking of the show Mass and Form, where you
propel forms and disappear inside them…
I don’t trust the introspective control of the subject.
Although I know it is always in play as the strategy of
survival and human functioning, I am more interested in
contemplating a place where the control is revealed to
be illusory, defective, partial, just one side of the possible perspective on a situation… In the past seven years,
my artistic process has been focused on the idea of the
objectness and subjectness of the dancer, her body, and
the movement of that body, i.e., its dancing. I think my
work occupies the middle ground between the senses and
the rational – sometimes I still feel that this dichotomy
is a shaky ground, a zone of conflict, and I often digest
it through work.
I value working with colleagues who are dedicated
observers of how the awareness of embodiment changes
Movements 23 | 24 _ 163
the procedure of existence, and how in this sense dance
is political, poetic, subversive, innovative. This is not
a simple or easy position to hold in today’s world, it’s
very marginalized, which is quite self-explanatory in a
society where body is subject to such manipulation and
exploitation that it has to be emptied out in order to be
controlled. As a result, any attempt at a more thoughtful
topology of the body as an interface for experiencing
life seems to be disappearing.
We are like fools in tarot.
Body requires a high degree of composure, tenderness,
sensitivity, refusal to settle for a safe position of knowledge, and all of these are fairly crazy positions to take.
Isabelle Schad is one such colleague. I cherished working with her on Mass and Form, because she approaches
dance as a personal political practice and she gives it
room to build a body of work while protecting it from
the constraints that would diminish it. It’s important
to her to surrender to dance and to re-evaluate through
that experience what dance is and what its virtuosity/
depth means for me.
Objectness – meaning all the information gained by
touch – describing those through language is a very difficult task, because they operate quite differently, but
they, and not objecthood, are what interests me. If I
imagine the body as a living object, I see it as expanding
our existing image of the body, in which the part that we
usually take for granted (its a priori materiality) becomes
huge. To support this un/spectacular hugeness, you need
interior precision work with the body sense, which is
grounded enough to be able to notice emerging and disappearing images, situations, objectness and to resonate
with them without exhausting itself or becoming stalled
on that level – instead, it should be able to listen, accept,
release, be in the void…
¬ Could you please comment on this quote by William Forsythe: “A choreographic object is not a substitute for the body, but rather an alternative site
for the understanding of potential instigation and
organization of action to reside.” I would also ask you
to comment on this autobiographical note that Deborah Hay made in 2000: “She likes to juggle. Instead
of balls or batons, she practices with four or five
perceptual experiences at once. She drops balls, but
it doesn’t matter. (…) The director should know she
prefers juggling to catching the ball. There is no time
to capture or translate when someone is juggling.
This freedom from knowing arouses the curiosity
that precedes question-making. And this is where
she feels the performance lives.”
164 _ Kretanja 23 | 24
I would say that my understanding of dance as an
object is similar inasmuch as seeing dance as an object
shifts perception towards the materiality of the immaterial – to those edges and depths of the living object you
mentioned in your previous question – the textures of
sensing time and space (even meaning), or rather, the
relations that are built through dance as taking action/
being in the body.
Paradoxically, our perception of our own existence
hinges on the existence of the body, and the fact that
we are incapable of fully comprehending that existence lies at t he root of who we are. Alt hough t his
surplus of existence keeps eluding our perception, we
are capable of comprehending/sensing that there is a
surplus somewhere beyond our comprehension. The
moment we become aware of it and thus turn it into
an object of our own understanding, the production
of surplus starts to slip away beyond the boundaries
of that understanding. This dynamic of slipping away,
of continued discontinuity is what interests me as a
choreographic principle.
¬ You dedicated an entire show to the problem of
invisible and immeasurable value, indeed to art as
overabundant value that cannot be expressed in categories of time or material accumulation, i.e., the
material gain. What does it mean for you to live this
overabundance of invisible work, learning, keeping
your sensors open on a daily basis? How would you
describe the operative, reflexive and affective motor
of your ecosystem? How do you nurture yourself as
a dance artist? Maybe you could also address this
Deborah Hay’s statement from the 1970s: “It doesn’t
matter whether what you show is true or not. Just
take feedback into account as you perform it. Your
practice opens up my practice.”
I love that quote by Deborah Hay because it reminds
me that what I consider important information worthy
of artistic effort is what happens outside/beside/after
truth, intention, knowledge, thought; they are here merely
to instigate, to be surrounded by realities. For me the
work is created through relation. Generally speaking, I
am interested in relation and how a relation creates an
oversupply of open space in regards to the self. That’s
why collaborations matter to me, and why it matters to
me to do solo work (which is why the MA in Solo/Dance/
Authorship that I completed was so important to me);
creating solo work simply means that you switch that
membrane of touch between the other and the self to a
different frequency (and anyway, the others are present
– in rehearsal space, in life – the entire time).
interview: Sonja Pregrad Recently I’ve developed an interest in work/collaborations that explore the awareness of how a relationship
can open up the self, like the aforementioned Value with
Marjana Krajač, where she and the audience are in one
space, while I’m on a different location, mediated through
Skype, or the work Rearranging (and) the Self-Arranged
with Nives Sertić, in which the two of us and the media
we use (dance and photo/video respectively) are questioned through our relationship as we attempt to perform an unhierarchical and non-utilitarian relationship
between these two media.
¬ Which collaborations do you think shaped you as
an author and why? Do you think it’s important to
name your mentors, role models, teachers, guiding
lights, people who helped you find your authorial
voice? Even if they don’t come from the artistic
milieu?
That’s an interesting question, because, truthfully,
so far I haven’t felt the need to specifically mention
my teachers and role models. On the contrary, I used
to have an aversion to it. What usually stays with me
as an inspiration is a moment that includes a person,
her work, the immediate, specific context in which the
work takes place; whatever arises from it goes beyond
what we usually define as individual authorial work. I
think this approach has made my development more
difficult, because I usually decide against adopting methods, approaches and aesthetics that I find interesting.
Instead, I feel the way through the space that interests
me intuitively and that’s how I find strategies. However,
now I can see something changing within my practice and
I think it has to do with its longevity and the changing
perspective – I am becoming increasingly interested in the
question of lineage of my dance practice and performative
and dance practices of the scenes to which I belong – this
year’s festival, Improspections2015, is dedicated to articulation of this very issue and I am so pleased we were
able to bring together so many people from the dance
scene in the Fish Lizard Leopard Man lab, facilitated by
my Berlin colleagues Maria F. Scaroni and Peter Pleyer.
In the lab, we are focused on practical re/articulation of
dance roots, our own and the collective ones – I am so
happy we are all doing this together, making the effort
as one (tiny) community.
I completed the School of Contemporary Dance (today
the Ana Maletić School of Contemporary Dance), but
I’ve also started to realize how much I was shaped by
later training that emphasized the study of movement
not just as a form to be learned, but also movement as
something that has its own spatial, temporal and qualita-
tive parameters – Laban’s movement analysis served as a
starting point. I also studied at ArtEZ1 with the pioneers
of American postmodern dance such as Eva Karczag and
Mary O’Donnell Fulkerson, learning a number of somatic
practices (contact improvisation, functional anatomy,
Alexander, qigong…) and different types of improvisational work. I remember the cultural shock (not only in
the general sense but also in terms of dance) of going
to the Netherlands and encountering American (and
Dutch) postmodern dance. I remember how moved I
was by the early works of Jerome Bell and Emi Greco’s
Extra Dry, which I’d seen shortly after starting my dance
studies in the Netherlands. After completing the course
and returning to Croatia, I think the home-grown scene
became my point of reference, and by that I mean not
just the dance scene, the visual arts scene or art scene in
general, but also the social and political scene. My own
work has always been (un/consciously) geared towards
it, but throughout it all I maintained various collaborations abroad, and that always opened up space in terms
of self as the internalized primary context of my work.
During this period, my key collaborations in Croatia were
with Irma Omerzo, who supported me during the crucial
period of my development as a professional dancer by
working with me constantly, and with Zrinka Šimičić
Mihanović, who was the first person who reached out
to share and collaborate with me after I returned from
studying abroad. I can say with great joy and gratitude
that I have been collaborating with her for many years
now, on the Improspections initiative/festival of improvisation and on a number of other pedagogical and creative
projects too.
¬ Feminist artist Sanja Iveković chose you as a close
collaborator and performer of the remake of one of
her earlier performances. What is your stance on
feminist knowledge?
I began collaborating with Sanja in 2009, after she
invited me to be a performer in the remake of her 1982
performance Practice Makes a Master, staged for the occasion of the re.act.feminism project, dedicated to archiving
and showing feminism in art. I am thankful to feminist
knowledge, as I am to dance knowledge and queer knowledge – to many people who articulated and insisted on
positions that diverge from the dominant narrative. I am
thankful for collaboration with Sanja and for her work
as a whole, because they shifted my perception of my
(own) dance and creative work towards the context of
1
Arnhem Entschede Zwolle Art Academy (ArtEZ hogeschool voor
de kunsten in Arnhem, Enschede en Zwolle).
Movements 23 | 24 _ 165
visual art and performance, towards local narrative and
art, and towards deeper understanding of finely tuned,
precise intermedial formalism that marks her work and
inspires my choreographic practice. Afterwards I felt the
need to define my own work, which is why I went to
pursue the MA course in Berlin, where I balanced the
need to define my solo work with the need to continue
developing it through multiple collaborative relationships
and projects. It was important for me to open up to a
new field of action in Berlin and Europe – that’s how I
started collaborating with my MA colleague, Willy Prager,
which has been going on for years now. Willy has a theatrical background and working with him always revolves
around a mutual reformulation of ideas through diverse
approaches and intuitions. It was equally important to
me to remain active in my own local context – here the
participation in Marjana Krajač’s What Am I Worth symposium proved to be very fertile. The symposium invited
the dance community to discuss the issue of re-evaluating
the situation in which we currently work; I presented
my paper over Skype, from Berlin, which gave me the
opportunity to marry both contexts. Nicole Hewitt’s
invitation to teach movement and performance to the
students of the Animation and New Media Department
at the Academy of Fine Arts is equally important to me,
as is the ongoing work on Improspections. Dealing with
multiple and diverse aspects of dance – authorial, performative, pedagogical, intermedial, organizational – gives
me a wealth of relations within which I can develop my
technique, my toolbox, a complex picture of the landscape
I inhabit.
¬ At the moment you live in Bulgaria, Germany and
Croatia, at least judging by the shows you put on.
Can you comment on production differences between
these cultures when it comes to putting on a dance
show? Have you encountered genuine cosmopolitism
in any of them?
Right now, I consider Zagreb my home base, with
Berlin as a close relative I visit often. Berlin might be the
closest to the idea and practice of cosmopolitism, but it
is also extremely exhausting, because its art scene and
social scene are overpopulated, transitional and therefore
ungrounded and precarious. For our Berlin production
of Sequel for the Future / Dance in 2043 / Dance in 2044
in Berlin, Willy and I received funding five times higher
than what we would have gotten in Croatia, but our
fees for the project were almost the same as in Croatia,
because dance production in Berlin is so much more
expensive (from renting space, producer’s commission
etc.) Additionally, the number of artists applying for fund-
166 _ Kretanja 23 | 24
ing every year is so high that the chance of us receiving
ongoing funding is very slim. This applies to most dance
artists there, and it makes long-term, substantial creative development that much harder. Still, our new show
Balkan Dance Reality Show has co-produced by Fabrik
Potsdam and Théâtre de Nîmes, which means that there
are sources of funding other than the state-owned bodies
and that there are other sufficiently serious models of
supporting art that we in Croatia don’t have. In recent
years, strong effort has been made in Berlin to design
strategies for the funding and development of the dance
scene, which tragically isn’t the case in Croatia, despite all
the efforts of numerous courageous colleagues throughout the 2000s. As for Bulgaria, this is yet another kind of
mirror, because their standard is significantly lower (as I
walked around Sofia in my first weeks there, I felt like a
spoilt rich girl) and due to historical circumstances, their
dance scene is much smaller. Reflected in such a mirror,
our own scene seems more powerful – more dance artists,
a bit more performance venues, a bit more activity, a
bit more funding… but the post-transition context and
conditions are actually very similar.
¬ How would you compare attitude to dance at the
New Media Department of the Zagreb Academy of
Fine Arts with the dance training you received in
Berlin and Arnhem? How would you describe the
pedagogical methods?
In Arnhem, dance was a medium explored from
within; as we learned to dance we learned to breathe,
stand, sing, observe time, space and (our own inner)
body shapes, and many more things through which
we built and defined the territory of being a dancer.
In Berlin, dance as a medium was explored from the
outside, through relationship with theory, writing and
other media practices pursued by students and professors
there. At the Academy of Fine Arts, I see my workshop
on movement and performance as an aspect of materiality/mediateness of the work that students learn about
(grounded in the body and time of creation – as opposed
to object-oriented art), or as a point of reference against
which the students of visual arts can define their own art.
¬ Are you an idealist?
I’m a body-ist. And a relation-ist.
¬ Could you describe a dance show that impressed
you lately and explain why it stays with you as an
inspiration to draw from?
One of my mentors during the MA was Jeanine Durning, whose solo inging was shown at the last year’s Sound-
interview: Sonja Pregrad bodies festival in Zagreb. Jeanine starts her performance
by walking around and clearly allowing a real encounter
with audience members as they enter the performance
space. Chairs are scattered around the room and there
is a table with a pile of books on it, which serves as a
camera stand. At one point, Jeanine sits down behind
the table, switches the camera on and starts a steady
stream of talk – speaking in a single uninterrupted sentence from the beginning to the end of the performance.
Through the conceptual task of perpetuating speech and
the material impossibility of that task, speech becomes
an embodied monster, a space of discontinued continuity, encounters, collisions, chasms, shaping of the self
beyond the self. Speech becomes the dance of the body
that speaks, that slips away from speech and produces
an oversupply, the body captured in speech, overlapping
with speech, running late, escaping, stumbling, panting,
crying. Speech speaks to us and to itself. Speech swallows
itself and creates this space of oversupply that is very
exciting, sensuous and sensory. The performance ends
with the decision to stop speaking and a long moment
of silence, in which the consequence and resonance of
this forceful action settle into silence and into the perception of everything that was previously changed by
the domination of speech – time, space, bodies in it,
their relations to each other. Jeanine’s work and her
solo performance inging resonate with me deeply for the
way they explore the body, which is at once subjective,
dancing, and political, for how they explore dance as the
activity of such body, and for what their implications
are in terms of the experience, participation and role of
the audience that such work proposes so courageously.
¬ Finally, ever since the 1st World War and throughout the 20th century, art has upheld a very strong taboo
against expressing jouissance. There is an insistence on
the most brutal possible representation of pain, harm,
anger, helplessness, aggression. A legitimate approach,
to be sure, but it leaves an entire range of our sensory
responses unexplored and neglected. What is your
view of the matrix of the enjoying body and the body
unafraid of knowledge generated by pleasure?
Pleasure and ecstasy are not taboos for me. I think
pleasure is political and important. I achieve it through the
materiality of experience, which admittedly does not shout
or agitate for non-stop revolution. Rather it enjoys working with other bodies. For example, with Willy Prager and
his productive superficiality, with our joint reformulation
and mutual contamination, which results in us not being
able to fully understand each other, just like we cannot
fully comprehend the pleasure of playing or performing.
¬ I would describe you as an exceedingly sensual
artist. How do you see sensuality on the stage?
Perhaps as something to do with submissiveness, with
letting various impulses happen to me, with surrendering to interaction. If I compare it to bodies that can do
anything, it is a fact that nothing unexpectedly intimate,
nothing sensual can happen with those supercompetent bodies. For me, many passionate performances in
the 1980s and 1990s were skin-deep, plastic, strictly
controlled, instrumentalized and therefore politically
very problematic. In art, I value pleasure and audacity
both. They are also very immediate in how they relate
to the audience; they open us up to others. From that
perspective, sensuality might, after all, be something
more than submissiveness – an interest in being with
others in an unsheltered way.
English translation: Dubravka Petrović
Nataša Govedić holds a PhD in Comparative Literature
and Theatrology. She is the author of twelve books on theatrology, one of the founders of the biweekly magazine for
cultural and social issues Zarez, editor-in-chief of the feminist
academic journal Treća and regular theatre critic for Novi list.
She is an assistant professor at the Academy of Dramatic Arts
in Zagreb. She co-founded a performance collective called
the Institute for Catastrophe and Chaos. She writes poetry and children’s books and she actively participates in the
independent theatre scene as a dramaturge and performer.
Movements 23 | 24 _ 167
predstava: Tijelo
predstava: Tijelo < Tijelo, Foto: Renato Branđolica >
DEJAN KOŠĆAK
Svijest tijela
i tjelesnost
svijesti
O predstavi Tijelo Mirjane Preis
U
predstavi Tijelo 1 Mirjana Preis 2 gotovo holistički
progovara o psihosomatskim principima funkcioniranja ljudskog tijela. Tijekom izvedbe glavnu ulogu
1
Premijerno izvedena 8. prosinca 2014. u Zagrebačkom kazalištu mladih.
2
Mirjana Preis je 1970. završila Školu za ritmiku i ples, a 1976.
diplomirala komparativnu književnost i latinski jezik na Filozofskom fakultetu u Zagrebu. Od 1970. do 1987. članica je Studija za
suvremeni ples, s kojim je nastupala u zemlji i inozemstvu plešući
u svim projektima ansambla. Stručno se usavršavala u Kölnu, New
Yorku, Londonu i Parizu. Status slobodne umjetnice dobila je 1974.
Od 1987. stalno je zaposlena u Učilištu Zagrebačkog kazališta
mladih kao plesna pedagoginja i koreografkinja. Surađivala je s
Hrvatskom radiotelevizijom na videoprojektima Prolazna soba i
Rubato u režiji Nane Šojlev, s kojima je gostovala na festivalima u
Francuskoj i Njemačkoj. S videom Suzanin dnevnik sudjelovala je
u projektu European Video Dance Exchange. Neki od navedenih
projekata satelitski su emitirani na umjetničkim programima raznih
televizija. Dobitnica je Nagrade hrvatskog glumišta za najbolju
predstavu 2004. (Kaputt) i strukovne nagrade UPUH-a 2012. Od
1977. ostvarila je brojne koreografije za Studio za suvremeni ples,
Hrvatsku televiziju i Učilište ZKM-a: Igra (1977), Volpone (Ben
Jonson, Splitsko ljeto 1977), Preludij za poslijepodne jednog fauna
(1979), Studio for Image (1981), Traženja (1985), Metamorfoze (1986,
gostovanje u Seulu), Ptice (1989), Prolazna soba (1990, gostovanje u Grčkoj), Exhibition (1991), Rubato (1992, video prikazan na
preuzima tijelo koje razmišlja, odlučuje, zadovoljava vlastite
potrebe. Svaka svjesna reakcija, svako promišljanje sastoji
se i od svoga somatskog para koji se manifestira pokretom
ili u interakciji s okolinom. Koreografkinja promišlja o dualitetu psihičkoga i fizičkoga u kojem se osjećaji reflektiraju
pokretom i tjelesnim funkcijama. Kao što i sama kaže: „Emocije nastaju u tijelu. Nestalni kakvima se čine, naši osjećaji
zapravo nastaju u kretnjama naših mišića i pokretima naše
utrobe. Štoviše, ti materijalni osjećaji i fizički pokreti, nužni su za proces razmišljanja.” Tijekom promatranja izvedbe
teško je ne pomisliti na već pomalo izvještačenu sintagmu
festivalima Grand Prix International Video Danse u Parizu i Dance
Screen u Frankfurtu), Suzanin dnevnik (1992, Video Danse u Parizu),
Big iz bju;tiful (1999, gostovanje u Almadi), Ukradena cipela (2000,
Dance and the Child International, konferencija u kanadskoj Regini), Kaputt (2003, gostovanja u Peruu i Portugalu), Žena koja puno
priča (2005, gostovanja na High Fest u Erevanu, Milanu, CIFET-u
u Kairu), Maraton (2007, gostovanja u Grazu, Skopju, Ljubljani,
Slovačkoj, Sarajevu), Gyekenyes band (2008), Monster Tamer (2009,
projekt Dance Exploration Beyond Front@), P/okreni se (2010,
predstava kreativne radionice MSU-a i ZKM-a, zajedno s Desankom
Virant), Leda (Miroslav Krleža, režija Boris Svrtan, koreografija
Mirjana Preis, GDK Gavella, 2011), Muž + žena = kuhinja (2011), Na
putu prema gore (2013), Tijelo (2014).
Movements 23 | 24 _ 169
predstava: Tijelo
„govor tijela”, međutim (i srećom) izbjegnuta je očiglednost
i doslovnost takva potencijalnog fraziranja. Sama predstava
nadahnuta je pjesmom Dorte Jagić 3 rad tijela za početnike4 :
tijelo spava.grebe.
raste.mokri.mršti.siše.
sjedi.bljuje.pući.
trepće.liže.čeka.pljuje.
udara.goni.udiše.pucketa.
rumeni.tamni.stoji.kiše.
otvara.savija.zatvara.paluca.
diše.svrbi.polijeva.kotrlja.
probada.stenje.prazni.ježi.miriše.
prlja.krvari.suzi.gruša.
trči.širi.stavlja.dolazi.penje.pušta.
gazi.puši.omata.pleše.
kleči.ustaje.kipti.nadnosi.
oplakuje.tare.ziba.zapinje.
pije.dira.grije.pruža.krije.
suši.slini.sija.troši.rađa.slazi.
krcka.kaplje.grli.jede.grize.
koči.pada.luči.miče.
svlači.klapne.
ode.
U pjesmi je tijelo opisano na izrazito ritmičan način, gotovo krnje, a slična forma preuzeta je u koreografiji djela, pa
tako Mirjana Preis putem tijela plesačice Ine Sladić pronalazi
razna stanja, radnje i zbivanja u kojima tijelo percipira prostor,
okolinu, posjetitelje, ali i vlastitu svjesnost.
Predstava započinje ulaskom tijela, a ne izvođačice, u
zatamnjeni prostor dvorane Miško Polanec u Zagrebačkom
kazalištu mladih, čime je uspješno naglašen dalji tijek i kontekst same izvedbe. Naime, predstava započinje igrom dijelovima tijela, a tek potom vidimo prepoznatljivu izvođačicu.
Takav jasan i decidiran početak najavio je tijelo kao glavnog
aktera kojeg i sama izvođačica Ina Sladić povremeno iščekuje u trenucima kad izlazi iz svoga „plesnog izvođačkog
lika” i ulazi u publiku gdje preuzima ulogu promatrača. Jedan
3
Dorta Jagić, višestruko nagrađivana hrvatska pjesnikinja, rođena je 1974. u Sinju. Piše poeziju, kratku prozu, dramske tekstove
i eseje. Uvrštena je u brojne pjesničke antologije, a pjesme i priče
prevedene su joj na mnoge strane jezike. Bavi se i kazališnom pedagogijom i režijom u studentskim grupama u Zagrebu.
4
Dorta Jagić, Kauč na trgu, Biblioteka poezije, Hrvatsko društvo
pisaca, Zagreb, 2011, str. 82.
170 _ Kretanja 23 | 24
od tih trenutaka interaktivno uvodi izabranog posjetitelja u
najrazrađeniji moment predstave u kojem taj isti posjetitelj
pomaže slikati krokije plesačice, izrazito važne za kasniju
jukstapoziciju dvodimenzionalne statike i trodimenzionalnog
kretanja – Ina Sladić pauzira i bilježi vlastito tijelo na velikim
bijelim papirima pričvršćenima na zidu, koje potom proučava i kontrastira zahtjevnijem plesnom pokretu. Na taj način
iz zabilježene plošnosti stilizirana pokreta izlazi u prostor
istražujući puni potencijal pokreta, a promatraču se u tom
trenutku omogućuje vizualni kontrast koji jasno komunicira
o navedenu suodnosu plošnoga i prostornoga. Glazba bi mogla graditi sličnu dinamiku, ali je u pojedinim sekvencijama
monotona i jednolična.
Tjelesnim sekvencijama izvedbe Mirjana Preis postiže odmak od mimetike stilizirana ponašanja i pokreta, izvlačeći i
naglašavajući izmijenjenu fizikalnost svakodnevice i materijalizirajući psihičke procese. Unošenjem humorističnih epizoda
publici je ilustrirana tjelesnost nekih od najosnovnijih procesa
kao što su zaljubljivanje ili glad, a koji su zahvaljujući humoru
i karizmatičnosti Ine Sladić iskomunicirani na jednostavan i
čitljiv način. Umjesto scenografije upotrijebljena je arhitektura
izvedbenog prostora, koja se tijekom izvedbe upotpunjuje i
mijenja, rolama papira i tijelom Ine Sladić koje se kreće prostorom i reagira na njega. Kao što i José Gil postulira kako
plesač „luči, odnosno generira prostor svojim pokretima”, tako
i Mirjana Preis koreografira arhitekturu prazne crne plohe. Ina
Sladić svojim kretanjem i načinom na koji se koristi rekvizitima
mijenja teksturu prostora, tijelom koje ispuhuje dim cigarete
materijalizira zrak u vidljivu komponentu plesnog prostora.
Prostor njezina tijela, forme kojima se rastvara ili uvlači u sebe,
forme kojima ulazi u prostor ili iz njega izlazi nadovezuju se
na izvođački prostor i čine funkcionalnu cjelinu. Tijelo taktilno istražuje papir, pod, stube, vrata, dok istodobno tim istim
fizičkim materijalom iscrtava unutarnje stanje svijesti.
U konačnici, Mirjana Preis koreografirala je temeljnu i sigurnu predstavu koja propriocepcijski promišlja svakodnevno
tijelo u izvedbenom kontekstu.
Movements 23 | 24 _ 171
razgovor: Ina Sladić
razgovor: Ina Sladić < Tijelo, Foto: Renato Branđolica >
DEJAN KOŠĆAK
NE MORAMO
UVIJEK
SHVATITI SVE
Razgovor s
Inom Sladić
I
na Sladić rođena je u Zagrebu 1986. Nakon završene Škole za suvremeni ples Ane Maletić u Zagrebu nastavila je
školovanje primivši punu školarinu Umjetničkog sveučilišta Folkwang (Folkwang Universität der Künste) u Essenu u
Njemačkoj, gdje su joj predavali Malou Airaudo, Lutz Förster,
Rodolpho Leonim i mnogi drugi, te je diplomirala 2011. Kao
izvrsna studentica pozvana je da sudjeluje u izboru novog
baletnog profesora u Folkwangu te je sudjelovala u međunarodnoj studentskoj razmjeni na Vrhovnom državnom konzervatoriju za glazbu i ples u Lyonu (Conservatoire national
supérieur musique et danse de Lyon) pod mentorstvom Anne
Martin. Godine 2010. pohađala je radionicu izvođenja Posvećenja proljeća Pine Bausch. Tijekom školovanja pohađala je
radionice Adriaana Luteijna, Matjaža Fariča, Gregora Lušteka,
Davida Zambrana, Juana Cruza Díaza de Garaija Esnaole,
Dominiquea Mercyja, Libby Nye, Keren Levi i drugih. Nakon diplome surađivala je s brojnim umjetnicima (Xavierom
Le Royem, Mårtenom Spångbergom, Marinom Abramović,
Johannesom Wielandom, Simone Forti, Joan Jonas, Irenom
Mikec, Mirjanom Preis), od 2011. do 2013. godine nastupala
je kao gostujuća plesačica u skupini Fredewess u Hannoveru,
a u Njemačkoj operi na Rajni u Düsseldorfu gostovala je u
predstavi Princeza na zrnu graška.
Ina Sladić stvara i samostalne projekte od kojih je najpoznatiji Experimentallabor, nastao suradnjom s multimedijskim umjetnicima i predstavljen 2012. na dOCUMENTI (13)
u Kasselu. Uz potporu Gradskog ureda za kulturu Wuppertal
i Galerije Kunstkomplex stvorila je radove In Between, 3.14,
Zimmer 109, Room 18, Bangpainting i Body as An Instrument
of Pain. Godine 2013. bila je glavna asistentica u produkcijskom timu Dana suvremenog plesa u Varaždinu, na kojima
je 2014. izvela Navigating Darkness, djelo koje je u sklopu
projekta Nomad On the Road izvela i na IKS-festivalu u Splitu
2013. Kao glavna asistentica Sanje Tropp Frühwald radila je
na produkciji djela No Logo Opera(tion) kolektiva VRUM i
kainkollektiva. Projekt 100 Years of Paranoia u suradnji s
Eberhardom Kranemannom (Kraftwerk, Neu!, Fritz Müller)
predstavila je 2014. na desetom međunarodnom festivalu Directors Lounge u Berlinu, a najnoviji rad #sveštotrebateznati,
nastao je u rezidenciji Domina, u sklopu festivala Perforacije.
¬ Da započnemo razgovor tvojom procjenom situacije
plesnog obrazovanja u Hrvatskoj?
Mnogo bolja no što je bila kad sam ja odlazila. Moj odlazak u inozemstvo zapravo je bio potaknut isključivo time što u
Hrvatskoj nije bilo mogućnosti za daljnje obrazovanje. Tada je
Movements 23 | 24 _ 173
pozitivno bilo da sam pripadala jednoj od sretnijih generacija
u Školi suvremenog plesa Ane Maletić koja je imala priliku
sudjelovati u mnogim radionicama i dodatnim programima
koje je škola organizirala izvan vlastita nastavnog plana. Također, to je ujedno bilo vrijeme kad su se ljudi počeli vraćati
s akademija, tako da sam imala sreću promijeniti čak šest
različitih tehnika i profesora tijekom srednje škole. Iz škole
sam izašla s dosta raznolikim znanjem o svemu i svačemu i s
vrlo opširnim poznavanjem Labana, čime se dobiva nevjerojatna osviještenost prostora. Trenutačno vidim da Hrvatska
ima iznimno jako izvaninstitucionalno obrazovanje u plesnim
studijima koji nemaju službeni status škole. Nedavno sam
imala i prvi doticaj s akademijom1 u predstavi Hunting Family 2, uočila sam da postoji nekoliko studentica izvođačica
s vrlo velikim potencijalom. Više o akademiji ne znam, jer još
nisam imala priliku upoznati ju pobliže, ali znam da ima vrlo
kvalitetne predavače. Plesno obrazovanje na više je nego
solidnoj razini, barem kako se meni čini.
¬ Kakva je bila percepcija okoline kad je u pitanju bilo
tvoje profesionalno usmjeravanje na ples?
Imala sam sreću da su mi roditelji uvijek bili velika potpora i da sam i sama uvijek bila jaka i nisam pridavala mnogo
pozornosti tipičnim hrvatskim pitanjima tipa: dobro, ali čime
zarađuješ novce? Mislim da je upravo to pitanje isto tako potaknulo prkos u meni pa zaista uživam u odgovoru: plesom!
Srećom, mene su ljudi nekako uvijek poticali i odobravali to
što radim. Ako izađemo izvan kazališnog okvira, veoma je
teško očekivati da ljudi zaista shvaćaju što mi to radimo. Ali
to nije samo u Hrvatskoj, nego svagdje. Njemačka ima drugu priču jer se tamo kulturno usmjerenje smatra tradicijom
i kad kažem da sam završila Folkwang, svi to smatraju vrlo
elitnim zvanjem.
¬ Kad je došlo vrijeme za daljnju profesionalizaciju i usavršavanje nakon srednje škole, čime si se vodila u izboru
škole? Završila si Umjetničko sveučilište Folkwang.
Pinom Bausch. Ne samo njom, ali ona je u svakom slučaju
bila veliki dio tog izbora. Sjećam se da sam jedino znala da
želim plesati. Zaista nisam imala pojma što želim plesati, sve
dok nisam, igrom slučaja, pogledala prilog na televiziji o Pini
Bausch i postala potpuno očarana njezinim jezikom. Činjenica
da plesna predstava može sadržavati tekst i kazalište natjerala
me da se zaljubim u plesno kazalište, koje je jednako veoma
prisutno u mome radu. Činjenica da ću četiri godine raditi
s njezinim plesačima, a ponajviše s njom samom (kad sam
došla na akademiju, Pina Bausch još je bila živa), činila me
toliko sretnom da mi nije bilo važno gdje je škola.
1
Preddiplomski studij suvremenog plesa na Akademiji dramske
umjetnosti u Zagrebu.
174 _ Kretanja 23 | 24
¬ Nakon završetka Folkwanga, kakva su bila tvoja prva
radna iskustva i projekti na kojima si radila?
Imala sam sreću da su me Xavier Le Roy i Mårten
Spångberg uzeli u projekt Production već na audiciji koja je
bila u svibnju 2011, dakle dva mjeseca prije no što sam dobila
diplomu. Tako da sam 3. srpnja dobila diplomu, a 5. srpnja
već počela raditi. S njima je bilo divno raditi. Dok sam još bila
na tom projektu, otišla sam na audiciju za skupinu Fredewess
u Hannoveru, u kojoj su mi odmah dali ugovor i u kojoj sam
kao gostujuća plesačica ostala do 2013. Nakon akademije
zapravo nisam imala stanku sljedećih osam mjeseci. Godine
2012. dobila sam prvi posao radeći za Marinu Abramović,
tako da su se kod mene stvari zapravo veoma brzo odvijale.
Što je divna stvar za samostalnog umjetnika.
¬ Koliko prostora i vremena preostaje plesnom izvođaču
tijekom obrazovanja da osim savladavanja osnovnih plesnih
tehnika razvija vlastiti plesni izraz?
Vjerujem da je na plesnoj akademiji jednako kao i u
svakom drugom umjetničkom obrazovanju. Vjerujem da
ni jedna škola nije savršena i da se kvaliteta visokog obrazovanja razlikuje od osobe do osobe – svatko ima jednaku
mogućnost i dobiva se mnogo slobode. Koliko ti sam tražiš,
toliko ćeš i dobiti. Koliko god to grubo zvučalo, to je tako.
Vlastiti plesni izraz ne razvija se samo radom u dvorani.
Tamo se razvija tehnika. Izraz se razvija tijekom života.
Istraživanjem, putem knjiga, filmova, pogotovo pogledanih
predstava (uvijek sam bila na svakoj za koju sam čula), jer
tamo se razvija vlastiti vokabular. Tako da vjerujem da se
vlastiti plesni izraz razvija mnogo više izvan studija nego
u njemu. Plesna tehnika nešto je sasvim drugo od plesnog
izraza. U školi dobiješ pregled stvari koje se odvijaju vani i
alat kojim možeš tražiti svoj jezik. Tehnika je osnova i alat
kojim tada izgrađujemo svoj jezik, a razvijanje plesnog izraza
(plesnog jezika) za mene je nekako veoma osobna stvar za
koju uvijek nađeš vremena i ona možda, na kraju krajeva,
nema ni jednu doticajnu točku s određenom tehnikom koju
si naučio tijekom obrazovanja.
¬ Radila si u nekoliko projekata s različitim umjetnicima
u Hrvatskoj i izvan nje, trenutačno radiš oboje. Koliko su
dobro umreženi koreografi i plesači u Hrvatskoj i/ili vani?
Onoliko koliko im treba. Umrežavanje je trenutačno jedan od najvažnijih alata za ostvarenje ciljeva. Koliko god se
želimo praviti da nije, on to jest. Umrežavanje je alat našeg
stoljeća kojem se jednostavno moramo prilagoditi. Dar za
umrežavanje nema veze s umjetničkim darom. Događa se
da moramo biti nadareni za oboje, a katkad to nije slučaj.
Umjetnička scena danas funkcionira tako da svatko od nas
vodi mali biznis i da je svatko od nas proizvod. Da bi tvoj
proizvod bio vidljiv, moraš ga prodati!
razgovor: Ina Sladić ¬ Iz tvog iskustva, kako izgleda optimalna suradnja koreografa i plesača? Koliku autonomiju plesač dobiva kad izvodi
tuđu koreografiju? Koliko je teško uskladiti isprepletanja
dvaju plesnih izraza u zajedničkom radu?
Mislim da to zaista ovisi o načinu suradnje. Postoje plesači
i postoje plesni umjetnici. I svijet treba oboje. Plesači rade
s koreografima koji im iznose vlastite ideje i pokrete i oni ih
tumače. Plesni umjetnici nekako radije surađuju s koreografima, odnosno preferiraju rad u kolektivima u kojima svatko
ima pravo iznijeti svoju ideju. Plesni umjetnici uglavnom rade
i vlastite radove te imaju potrebu biti kreativni na drugi način.
Bila sam dvije godine u skupini u Hannoveru isključivo u ulozi
plesačice. Od koreografa i njegova asistenta doslovno sam
preslikavala pokrete u svoje tijelo i svoj karakter. No to me
nekako nije ispunjavalo, pa sam počela raditi vlastite radove. U performansu je to drukčije, što je jedan od primarnih
razloga zašto sam se zaljubila u performans. Kod Le Roya i
Spångberga izvodila sam ideje kao Ina, a ne kao tijelo koje
tumači tuđi jezik. Tumačenje tuđeg jezika zanima me jedino u
slučaju u kojem imam slobodu za traženjem vlastitoga unutar
tuđega. U kainkollektivu, u kojem trenutačno radim, imam
potpunu slobodu tražiti svoj plesni vokabular u tuđem redateljskom okviru i to je forma u kojoj jako dobro funkcioniram.
¬ Je li zapravo učestala pojava da koreograf upotrebljava
plesače kao neutralan medij, da isključivo preuzimaju njegove forme i ponavljaju ih na sceni?
Ovisi o kojoj vrsti kazališta govorimo. Učestala je u koreografa koji funkcioniraju unutar neke institucije, ali učestala je i u koreografa sa snažnim vlastitim izrazom. Teško je
odgovoriti na to, a pritom ne misliti na jake koreografe koji
se, primjerice, bave tehnikom body-mind centering, u kojoj
se tijelo izvođača također preslikava u jezik koreografa, iako
ne onako kako očekujemo da će se to dogoditi. Teško je ne
pomisliti na Sashu Waltz u koje se u posljednje vrijeme opaža
snažan repetitivni plesni vokabular.
¬ Kad već govorimo o preuzimanju forma i ponavljanju,
gdje se ti smještaš između uvježbane i koreografirane
izvedbe te osmišljene ideje i forme oslobođene nekakvom
improvizacijom?
Pa na primjer, stvaram okvir koji mogu u svakom trenutku izmijeniti, moja struktura ostaje otvorenom za promjene.
¬ I kako publika reagira na uvježbano i na improvizirano?
Može li ona uopće opaziti razliku?
Naravno da može, u nekim slučajevima ako forma nestane, publika se izgubi, izgubi koncentraciju. Osobno smatram
da dramaturški treba predvidjeti neke neočekivane trenutke
da bi se ulovila pozornost, ali ako ti kao izvođač to možeš
bez unaprijed osmišljene strukture, super. Ali ne mogu to svi.
¬ U kojim si trenucima i suradnjama najviše opazila razvoj
vlastite plesne geste (jesu li to bile solo izvedbe, suradnje,
autorski rad)?
Ako zamijenim izraz plesna gesta izrazom izvođačka
snaga ili plesni vokabular, onda je definitivno riječ o Marini
Abramović, autorskom radu i kainkollektivu, koje su nekako
i ostale forme unutar kojih i danas funkcioniram. S Marinom
Abramović (Luminosity i Centerpiece) postala sam jačom
shvaćajući koncept izvođačke snage u samom postojanju, u
autorskome radu spoznala snagu vlastita istraživanja osobnog kazališnog vokabulara i u kainkollektivu osjetila snagu
individue unutar zadanog okvira na sceni s ostalih dvanaest
članova ansambla.
¬ Kažeš da je rad s Marinom Abramović bio izrazito važan
za tvoje umjetničko formiranje. Zapravo, jedna si od rijetkih umjetnica koje su prošle audiciju i izvodile rad Marine
Abramović. Kako se to dogodilo? Kakva je bila audicija i
što je Marina Abramović zapravo tražila od pristupnika?
Dogodilo se da mi je jedan poznanik e-mailom poslao
obavijest o njezinoj audiciji. U to vrijeme bila sam prilično opsjednuta njome, kupovala sam sve njezine knjige i istraživala
njezin rad pa sam mislila da moram ići na audiciju. Bila sam u
Hannoveru u kazalištu i imala predstavu baš na dan audicije,
ali sam svejedno odlučila otići. U skupini sam rekla da me neće
biti cijeli dan, otišla sam na vlak i vozila se tri sata do mjesta
održavanja audicije. Na audiciji nas je bilo oko tristo i rekli
su nam da možemo pristupiti audiciji za dva različita rada,
Marine Abramović i Revolving Door, ali ja sam htjela samo
nju. Audicija je bila jednostavna, nisu nas tražili imena, dali
su nam brojeve i poredali nas u vrste po dvadeset djevojaka.
Audiciju je održala Rebecca Davis, asistentica Marine Abramović i rekla nam da držimo ruke u trima različitim pozama
po pet minuta, znači, ukupno 15 minuta, sve vrijeme usredotočeno gledajući u neku točku dok ona ne kaže „sad” i u
tom trenutku svi smo ju morali pogledati u oči. I to je bilo to.
Nakon toga smo ostavili podatke i izašli. Tada sam upoznala i
Snežanu Golubović, još jednu asistenticu Marine Abramović.
Nakon jedno tri dana probudila sam se oko sedam ujutro i
vidjela e-mail naslovljen s „Da”. U poruci je pisalo: „Draga
Ina, sretna sam da vas je Marina izabrala da izvedete njezin
rad.” Audicija je bila u ožujku, a izvedba u kolovozu, što je
bilo dovoljno vremena da se pripremim i zapravo odlučim
želim li sudjelovati ili ne. Prije audicije nisu rekli koji je rad u
pitanju, a na audiciji su rekli da to može izvoditi samo žena
i da će morati biti gola.
¬
Koliko je ljudi prošlo prvu audiciju?
Odmah su izabrali samo tri žene, no poslije su shvatili da
sa samo nas tri ne mogu ispuniti cijelu izložbu, pa su pozvali
još tri djevojke koje su prethodne godine izvodile Imponde-
Movements 23 | 24 _ 175
rabiliju na Art Baselu da se priključe postavi Luminosityja.
Nakon početne euforije počneš razmišljati realno, mogu li ja
to izvesti, gola, na nekoliko metara visine. A onda se dovedeš
u stanje svijesti u kojemu je to u redu. Kad su počele probe,
radili smo vježbe za snagu chi gong, slušali smo njujorški
podcast Radio Lab, zapravo znanstvenu emisiju o ljudskim
granicama naziva Limits, svaki dan morali smo napraviti nešto
nesuvislo, za meditaciju smo odvajali crvenu od crne leće i
kad bismo ih odvojili, nakon dva sata, pomiješali bismo ih i
krenuli ispočetka, jednako tako prakticirali smo tišinu i slično.
¬ Kako je publika reagirala na tvoju izvedbu za vrijeme
trajanja izložbe?
Različito. Prva mi je na izvedbu došla majka mog tadašnjeg
partnera. To mi je bilo najteže, kad su ulazili ljudi koje znam.
Uvijek je bilo neke neugode. Možda je najgore iskustvo bilo
kad je u prostoriju dotrčalo dijete i ostalo stajati i gledati u
mene, da bi se u tom trenutku pojavio njegov otac i zaklopio
mu oči. Mislim da mu je otac tako formirao nekakav strah i
odbojnost, kao da je to što je promatrao loša stvar. To je bila
traumatizirajuća i uvjetovana reakcija. Ali, osim toga, ljudi su
dobro reagirali. Često su mi se obraćali nakon izvedbe i čudili
se da sam tako sitna, jer u izvedbi izgledam krupnije. Bilo je
krasnih ljudi koji su mi davali energiju, ali sedamdesetak posto
ljudi zapravo mi je oduzimalo energiju, to je bilo iscrpljujuće.
Novinari su bili dosta neugodni, htjeli su snimati i nakon konferencije za medije, i, možda najgore, u njemački su Bild na
naslovnicu stavili fotografiju jedne kolegice uz naslov Peep
show u muzeju, nakon čega je jedan posjetitelj pred tom kolegicom počeo masturbirati. U takvim situacijama pomagali su
nam stražari koji su prema nama razvili očinski odnos i brinuli
se o našoj sigurnosti. Kad nije bilo posjetitelja, govorili bi nam
da se opustimo i da će nam javiti u slučaju da se netko od
posjetitelja iz druge prostorije uputi prema nama. Međutim,
kad sam bila sama, morala sam najviše raditi, jer ako bih se
opustila, pala bih. Izvedba se nastavlja i kad nema publike u
prostoriji, jer ako izađeš iz tog stanja uma, ne možeš se vratiti.
¬
Kada si najkreativnija? Što te nadahnjuje u plesu?
Ne razmišljam o tome kad sam najkreativnija. Ujutro?
Na odmoru? Najkreativnija sam vjerojatno kad sam u svom
kaosu. Potiče me zaista svašta. Jean-Luc Godard, gradovi u
kojima se nalazim prvi put, literatura, blogovi, u posljednjih
nekoliko godina intenzivno fotografija, pogotovo Wolfgang
Tillmans, ljudi na glavnim kolodvorima, djeca, klubovi, prijatelji, Forced Entertainment, Henry Purcell, Marlene Dietrich,
Bette Davis, Lars von Trier, Karl Lagerfeld.
¬ Uključuje li tvoj rad kao plesačice i istraživački odnosno
teorijski rad? Koliko je plesna znanstvena građa dostupna
plesačima?
176 _ Kretanja 23 | 24
Apsolutno. Teorijski rad mi je vrlo važan. To su mi najdraži
momenti. Ući u knjižaru i naći tri knjige koje se bave istom
temom kao i ja, pročitati članak u časopisu Dazed & Confused
koji se bavi tom istom temom, pogledati Sunset Boulevard
iz 1950. i naći dijelove teme koja me zanima, razgovarati s
programerom koji trenutačno radi igricu dok sličnu pokušavam postaviti na scenu – bez toga mi nema ni smisla ući u
dvoranu. Taj je dio prisutan od rada Pine Bausch – ako nemaš
život koji te potiče izvan kazališta, što onda možeš pokazati
u kazalištu? Živi! Živi! Živi! „Život je gozba, a bijedni pušioničari uglavnom skapavaju od gladi”, kako kaže Auntie Mame.
¬ Boris Groys izvedbene umjetnosti vidi kao praksu umjetnosti. Gdje je prostor za teoriju u izvedbenim umjetnostima? Koji su tvoji umjetnički procesi koji ne uključuju samo
praktičan izvedbeni dio?
Teorija u izvedbenim umjetnostima stalno je prisutna.
Volim graditi karaktere na sceni i balansirati između njih.
Sam život teorija je izvedbenih umjetnosti. Koliko god to bio
klišej, nije postao klišejom bez razloga. Katkad provedem sate
gledajući isječke videa Forced Entertainmenta na YouTubeu,
katkad provedem sate istražujući blog Freunde von Freunden
koji daje uvid u stanove zanimljivih ljudi. Arhitektura me također jako nadahnjuje. Volim raditi s fotografijama, tako da
često tražim fotografije i analiziram ih te iz njih tražim indikatore pokreta. Volim flamanske majstore i često nadahnuće
nalazim u slikama iz 15. stoljeća te u njima tražim atmosferu
za komad. Mnogo pišem. Konstantno. Tako da je i to veliki
dio moga teorijskog istraživanja. Nikad ne izlazim bez svoje
crne bilježnice i kemijske olovke.
¬ Kad promišljaš o vlastitu radu, možeš li izdvojiti neko
primarno interesno područje kojim se baviš ili koje možda
aktivnije razvijaš?
Mislim da sam ga u jednom trenutku opisala kao laboratorij spektakla. Trenutačno me jako zanima spektakl i naša
uloga u njemu. Ne toliko reality showovi koliko naša želja
za višim, boljim, zanimljivijim. Svi težimo da budemo viđeni,
da budemo važni. A neki to dobivaju jednostavno čitanjem
trač-rubrike, dok se drugi ekstremno trude postati važnima
svojom genijalnom idejom na Instagramu. Važem između
ekstrema. Ništa vs. Sve. Potiče me utjecaj socijalnih medija na
naše suvremene živote. Propitivanje nemogućnosti pojedinca
da potpuno suosjeća s drugima u kontekstu društva spektakla u kojem je empatija nadomještena iluzijom i simulacijom
kontakta putem raznovrsne medijske tehnologije. Ispitivanje naše potrebe za nekime tko će nas spasiti anksioznosti
našeg stoljeća.
¬ Tvoj je rad poprilično interdisciplinaran, odradila si
nekoliko performansa od kojih je jedan bio i ponovljena
razgovor: Ina Sladić izvedba Marine Abramović, bila si uključena u suvremenu
baroknu operno-plesnu predstavu No Logo Opera(tion)
kao asistentica produkcije i naratorica u izvedbi, izvodila
si vlastita sola i izvedbe drugih koreografa. Koliko je teško
pronaći svoj izraz i svoj vokabular u različitim izvedbenim
formatima? Kakve su se specifičnosti umjetničkog rada
javljale s različitim izvedbenim formama?
Teško mi je odlučiti se za jedno. Smatram se izvođačicom i vjerujem da dobar izvođač mora biti sposoban
za prijelaze između mnogo forma. Nije mi toliko različito
izvoditi Centerpiece Marine Abramović ili biti naratoricom,
sjedeći na stolici sat i pol za vrijeme predstave. Ja sam izvođač. Što god radila. U No Logo Opera(tion) asistirala sam
u režiji i produkciji te izvodila na sceni. Što opet nekako
ima smisla. Kazalište je kazalište. Iza scene ili na sceni. I
to mi je jedino uvijek bilo važno, biti u kazalištu. Iako su
muzeji i galerije počele dijeliti to mjesto s kazalištem. Ako
si umjetnik danas, u 2015. godini, jako je teško staviti se
u poziciju samo jedne prakse. Svi znaju da sam radoholičar, tako da je samo važno da radim. Kamo god da me se
stavi, pronaći ću svoj način.
¬ Govoreći o izvođačevoj emisiji sadržaja i njegovoj apsorpciji među publikom, što za tebe predstavlja (u plesu
često) oslobađanje od narativne linije i prelazak u apstraktnu
formu? Kako publika reagira na takvo premještanje žarišta,
koliko je zapravo hrvatska publika upoznata i spremna na
vlastito interpretiranje apstraktnoga i interpretiranje pokreta kao medija?
Osobno ne volim odvajati forme i dijeliti ih na narativne
ili apstraktne. U mome kazalištu sve je dopušteno. Već dugo
ne bavim se samo plesnom formom. Ne zanima me trenutačno kao takva. Ne volim stavljati pojmove i forme u kutije
i obilježavati ih kao nešto što oni moraju biti. Mislim da svi
imamo dovoljno mašte da svaku predstavu shvatimo onako
kako ju želimo shvatiti. A ljepota svega možda i jest upravo
u tome da ne moramo uvijek shvatiti sve. Hrvatska publika
naučena je na konceptualni rad jer se već dugo provlači na
sceni. Problem hrvatske scene jest u činjenici da kazalištarci
rade predstave za kazalištarce. Barem je tako dosad bilo. S
vremenom se naravno sve mijenja i to je sjajno, ali katkad
imam osjećaj da ljudi koji nisu izravno uključeni u kazalište ne
žele ni dolaziti na plesne predstave jer se osjećaju isključeno.
Suvremeni je ples težak za shvatiti i samim umjetnicima, a
kamoli nekomu tko ne razumije ni prvu rečenicu napisanu
u programskoj knjižici. Lijepo je biti intelektualac, ali katkad
se moramo prisjetiti i činjenice da umjetnost radi umjetnosti
donosi i posljedice koje mi sami tada snosimo. Kazalište je,
na kraju krajeva, dugo čekalo na to da postane javno, da ga
svi mogu doživjeti. A sada se opet vraća na to da se radi za
određenu populaciju.
¬ Kad smo se već dotaknuli publike, možemo li govoriti
da publika konstruira izvedbu, jednako kao što čitatelj u
nekim teorijama konstruira književno djelo? Je li važnija
promatračeva interpretacija ili umjetnikova intencija?
Možemo li govoriti da publika konstruira izvedbu? Apsolutno. Uvijek stvaram svoje komade tako da ostavim barem
jedan dio kao strukturiranu improvizaciju koja meni daje dosta
slobode unutar moga okvira i svaka publika toj improvizaciji
daje nešto drugo. Svaki put energija i atmosfera publike daju
neku drugu, recimo tako, boju tomu što radim. A sad, je li
važnija intencija ili interpretacija? Mislim da ni jedno ni drugo nije važnije, imam svoju priču, ali ne želim da promatrači
imaju istu priču kao i ja. Želim da oni moju priču interpretiraju
na svoj način.
¬
Ne želiš da se tvoja i njihova interpretacija preklapaju?
Ne, želim da oni naprave svoju priču. Jer mislim da im je
zanimljivije. Jednako tako mogu ponovno spomenuti iskustvo
s Navigating Darkness u kojem je riječ o mojem strahu od
mraka. I bilo je stvarno genijalno vidjeti i slušati sve ljude koji
su mi nakon izvedbe prišli i priznali da se i oni boje mraka.
Njima je bilo hrabro moje priznanje da i dalje gledam pod
krevet prije spavanja. Freud strah od mraka u odrasloj dobi
zapravo smatra prvim znakom shizofrenije pa je ljudi shvate
osobno kad javno progovaram o svome strahu. Dosta radim
na osobnoj razini u svojim komadima.
¬ Vezano za interpretaciju viđenoga, Erika Fischer-Lichte
smatra kako tijekom performansa nije moguća interpretacija,
nego samo doživljaj, odnosno iskustvo promatranoga. Smatraš li i ti da interpretacija dolazi tek naknadno, dok se sam
umjetnički događaj prvo proživi pa tek poslije promišlja?
Da, dolazi poslije, i s jedne i s druge strane. Mislim da
umjetnik jednako poslije interpretira publiku, jer kad izvodiš,
previše si uživljen u izvedbu. Evo na primjer moj performans
Soba 109 koji je trajao tri sata. Unutar galerije sagradila sam
bijelu sobu i uredila ju kao čekaonicu. Prijatelj iz Kraftwerka za
to je skladao glazbu koja je svakih petnaest minuta prekidana glasom: „Molim, pričekajte!” Ljudi su na sjedalima dobili
upitnik, a umjesto ulaznica dobivali su brojeve. Soba je bila
izrađena tako da su na trima zidovima reflektirane samo moje
sjene, ne i posjetiteljeve. Ulazilo se pojedinačno, posjetitelji su
dolazili s ispunjenim upitnikom, koji je sadržavao pitanja tipa
„da si u glazbenom sastavu, bio bi” ili „od sljedećih filmova
najviše uživam u”, što je poslije bilo zanimljivo čitati, ali su mi
u prvom redu služili kao orijentir o broju posjetitelja. Svakog
posjetitelja fotografirala sam i pitala dvije stvari: prvo, što
rade stvarno dobro (a da nije povezano s poslom), tu su ljudi
često zastali i morali dobro razmisliti, a drugo, što bi htjeli
raditi na sceni, ali se srame pred drugim ljudima. Obično su
htjeli glasno vikati, ne znam zašto, pa bismo zajedno vikali,
Movements 23 | 24 _ 177
s time da bih s njima radila sve što su htjeli raditi, ali glasnije
od njih da drugi posjetitelji koji su vani čekali ne bi znali što
se događa. Jedan posjetitelj htio je popiti čašu šampanjca,
pa sam otišla do obližnjeg kafića i vratila se sa šampanjcem.
¬ Misliš li da si tako preispitivala njihove granice, jer si im
dala potpunu slobodu koju oni nisu iskoristili?
Da, dala sam im slobodu, ali kad si nasamo s nekim u
prostoriji, ne znam, svi su imali pristojan i blag pristup.
¬ Kako ti gledaš na odnos s publikom tijekom izvedbe? Što
publika daje umjetniku, a što zauzvrat može dobiti od njega?
Zapravo navest ću zanimljivu anegdotu kao odgovor na
to pitanje. Kad sam izvodila Navigating Darkenss u Varaždinu, odlučila sam snimiti rad, jer moram imati snimku za
festivale, vrlo praktično. Ekipa je snimila video zasebno, bez
publike, i sve je prošlo u redu, no ista ta ekipa poslije je bila
na izvedbi pred publikom i zaključili su da sam tada bila
nekoliko puta bolja, da se izvedba za video uopće ne može
mjeriti s izvedbom pred publikom. Iako sam znala da me se
snima i da je to nešto što će ostati dokumentirano, bila sam
pet puta slabija nego kad sam vidjela svu tu publiku koja je
poslije došla na izvedbu i koja mi je dala energiju da budem
kreativnija u trenutku.
¬
Dakle, ti od publike uzimaš energiju?
Da, ja sam općenito vrlo samodisciplinirana budući da
dolazim iz klasičnog baleta 2 , ali bez publike ne bih mogla.
¬
A što ti njima daješ zauzvrat?
Pa mislim da i ja njima dajem jednu vrstu energije koja
im omogućuje neki doživljaj, zapravo sebe na jedan drukčiji
način. Volim i ja otići u kazalište, zavaliti se u sjedalo da mi
bude ugodno, ali to nije što želim od svoje publike. Individualnim i intimnim pričama i oblicima koje izvodim publiku
tjeram da uđe u izvedbu. Smatram da to svakoga od nas
dotakne, možda je to nespretan izraz, ali čim daješ nešto
osobno, publika to osjeti, svatko od nas ima nešto osobno
s čime se možemo poistovjetiti. I mislim da je trenutačno to
iznimno važno, da se publika može poistovjetiti s onim što
gleda na sceni. Jednostavno smo u takvom dobu, svijest je
na drugoj razini, ljudi se žele poistovjetiti, ne žele vidjeti supermene nego žele vidjeti ljude.
¬ Kad si radila Luminosity, Marina Abramović je tipičnu
skopofiličnu poziciju muškog promatrača koji promatra
2
Ina Sladić je prije polaska u Školu suvremenog plesa Ane Maletić pohađala Školu za klasični balet u Zagrebu (od 1990. do 1995), a
i školovanje koje je završila na Umjetničkom sveučilištu Folkwang
bilo je klasično usmjereno, tako da je broj baletnih satova nadmašivao broj onih suvremenih plesnih tehnika.
178 _ Kretanja 23 | 24
golu žensku umjetnicu sukobila s tvojim izravno uzvraćenim
pogledom. Kako publika, naročito muška, reagira na takvu
promjenu pogleda, na činjenicu da tijekom performansa i
oni mogu postati objektom promatranja?
Ta promjena motrišta i općenito tematika izravna gledanja
u tom je radu možda jedan od najvažnijih elemenata. Neke
sam ljude gledala i po pola sata, osobito ako je bilo mnogo
ljudi, jer nisam mogla često mijenjati očište. Teško je gledati
i poznate ljude, ali bila sam u nekom drugom stanju pa nije
važno. Ženama je možda bilo neugodnije, možda jer se mogu
poistovjetiti i shvatiti koliko je tjelesno zahtjevna poza u kojoj se nalazim. Muškarcima je bilo posebno neugodno kad
bi promatrali mene kako gledam nekog drugog, a ja bih u
tom trenutku pogledala ravno u njih. To bi ih skroz izbacilo iz
takta. Ali u principu nije bilo nikakvih negativnih iskustava.
Muškarci su se trudili gledati u oči, kao, pogled će ostati samo
na očima. Stvarno su se trudili ostati diskretni.
¬ Radovi suvremenih izvedbenih umjetnosti katkad su
suviše konceptualni ili pak publici mistificirani pa približavanje kreativnog procesa i uvid u proces uvelike olakšavaju
komunikaciju između umjetnika i promatrača. Otvaraš li
umjetnički proces publici i kako (prije, tijekom ili nakon
kreiranja i izvedbe)?
U novom projektu #sveštotrebateznati proces se otvara
jednako kako se i gradi – vizualno, putem društvenih medija.
Na stranici društvene mreže Tumblr nalazi se građa upotrebljavana u radu (http://hashtageverythingyouneedtoknow.
tumblr.com/) i sva moja i nadahnuća Dore Đurkesac, vizualne
umjetnice s kojom radim, čime zapravo gradimo smisao cijele
predstave. Ubrzo prikazujemo i rad u nastajanju na radionici
o povratnim komentarima u Teatru &TD, tako da se proces
i na taj način otvara i poziva publiku na otvorenu kritiku.
¬ Na primjer, Peggy Phelan smatra da je performans,
odnosno izvedba efemerna, što je zapravo i njezina bit.
Amelia Jones donekle se slaže s tom tvrdnjom jer je za nju
performans/izvedba uvijek već u prošlosti te njegova dokumentacija označava kontradiktornost žive izvedbe i komodifikaciju umjetničkog događaja putem materijalizacije
izvedbe. Kako ti gledaš na dokumentaciju performansa,
odnosno izvedbe? Može li se uopće doživjeti posrednim
putem (fotografije, video)?
To je dosta teško pitanje. Jednako tako možemo postaviti
pitanje zašto Marina Abramović traži izvođače za ponovno
izvođenje (re-performance) svoga rada. Za mene je i to neka
vrsta dokumentacije performansa. Kao profesionalna plesačica umirem od dosade kad gledam snimku predstave, izgubi
se bit prezencije koja je meni najvažnija. To je jednako kao
kad smo pitali Rebbecu Davis zašto su na audiciji izabrali baš
nas, na što je odgovorila da je ključan trenutak bio kad smo
razgovor: Ina Sladić Movements 23 | 24 _ 179
na njezin znak pogledali u nju; u tom trenutku osjećaj mi je
bio jednak onom kad se s nekim prvi put poljubiš, ali ona je
zaključila da neki ljudi to jednostavno imaju u sebi, dok drugi
nemaju. To je bila njezina definicija, a nama je bilo u redu,
nije baš egzaktno, ali nema veze.
¬
Ima li za tebe umjetničke aure u dokumentaciji?
Pa meni je stvarno bilo zanimljivo i uzbudljivo vidjeti stolicu
na kojoj je Marina Abramović u Muzeju suvremene umjetnosti
izvela Rhythm II. S druge strane, zanimljivo mi je gledati njezine snimke na YouTubeu. Mislim da je jako važno dokumentirati
jer je izvedba kratkotrajna, ali teško je dobiti isti osjećaj samo
na temelju dokumentacije. Za povijesni je kontekst u redu.
¬ Za tebe je onda dokumentacija više stvar arhiviranja
nego da publika tim putem nešto doživi?
Apsolutno. Danas bih rado vidjela neku snimku Shakespearovih drama izvedenih u njegovo doba, iako znam da ne
bi bio jednak doživljaj meni i ljudima koji su bili tamo.
¬ Kako procjenjuješ situaciju sa suvremenim plesom? Ima
li kakvih pomaka i naslućuješ li nekakve promjene?
Suvremeno se odnosi na nešto što se odvija trenutačno.
Tako da je smiješno govoriti o tome ima li pomaka. Naravno
da ima, iz dana u dan. Suvremeno je nešto što je u doticaju
sa sadašnjim trenutkom, ne nešto što se događalo 2012.
To je prošlo, to više nije suvremeno. Promjena ima uvijek i
trenutačno mi se čini da sve vodi k tome da se izbrišu granice između disciplina i da se discipline jednostavno spoje,
tako da nema potrebe više govoriti o glumcima ili plesačima,
nego jednostavno o izvođačima, svatko od njih je u nečemu
posebno vješt, ali zajedno na sceni funkcioniraju homogeno.
¬ Što ti performans omogućava, a da možda nisi mogla
ostvariti u plesu ili nekom drugom mediju?
Osobnu transformaciju, apsolutno nedvojbeno.
¬ Često radiš izvan Hrvatske pa nerijetko putuješ u Njemačku, trenutačno si u Poljskoj. Kakva je razlika kad je u
pitanju status plesa na europskom tržištu i ovom našem?
Koliko je vani ples razvijen kao kulturni proizvod?
Najveća je razlika što vani ples mnogo dulje postoji u
okvirima obrazovnih i kazališnih institucija. Mislim da se zato
ples više cijeni kao profesija, iako plesna umjetnost u Hrvatskoj ima vrlo bogatu tradiciju. S obzirom na naše povijesne
događaje postojali su drugi prioriteti, naravno. No danas smo
tu gdje jesmo i pogledi na ples kao profesiju i kao kulturni
proizvod mijenjaju se. Zapravo posljednjih četiri-pet godina
imam osjećaj da je, pogotovo u Zagrebu, iznimno pomodno
imati veze sa suvremenim plesom, pogotovo populaciji od
dvadeset pet do trideset pet godina, što je sjajno.
180 _ Kretanja 23 | 24
¬ Što dalje kad se u tako tjelesnom mediju tijelo istroši –
ozlijedi ili ostari? Koliko je izražena takva vrsta neizvjesnosti
u tvom profesionalnom angažmanu?
Ne osjećam ju toliko jer dolazim iz zaleđa gdje je Nazareth
Panadero sa šezdeset godina na sceni najzanimljivija. Dominique Mercy sa šezdeset pet godina još pleše ulogu u Caféu
Müller. Marina Abramović sa šezdeset devet godina još izvodi
tjelesno iscrpljujuće performanse. Iz tog razloga ne osjećam
nikakav strah od starenja tijela. Čini mi se da su izvođači jači
što su stariji. Da sam ostala u klasičnom baletu, vjerojatno bih
razmišljala o tome, ali ovako mislim da nema potrebe. Naravno,
postoji neko svjesno pripremanje terena u majstorskim radionicama u kojima radim više na tekstu, što me jednako iznimno
zanima. Život je nepredvidiv i može donijeti svašta. Važno mi
je nastaviti se razvijati. U kojem smjeru će to otići, još ne znam.
Još tražim svoj put.
¬ U jednom prijašnjem razgovoru spomenula si svoju
„iskustvenu mapu u tijelu”. Kako ta mapa izgleda sada i
koliko se promijenila?
Iskustvena mapa tijela. Rekla bih da se mijenja svakim
novim projektom, svakim novim iskustvom. Nove se informacije dodaju, a starije se brišu. One koje su bitne ostaju,
one koje su bile prolazne ili važne u nekom periodu brišu se
s mape kako bi se ostvario prostor za nove. Ako sam to rekla
prije godinu dana, promijenila se jako.
¬ Često nakon svojih plesnih izvedaba završiš iza DJpulta. Kakav je tvoj profesionalni odnos prema glazbi u
kontekstu autorskih skladbi za određeno djelo. Pričali smo
o suradnji koreografa i plesača, kako izgleda suradnja skladatelja i izvođača/koreografa?
Glazba mi je iznimno važna u radu. Suradnja skladatelja
i izvođača, više autora u ovom slučaju, veoma je slična, ako
ne i jednaka, onoj izvođača i koreografa. Rad s Popsimonovom na glazbi za predstavu #sveštotrebateznati zapravo
je na istoj razini kao i onaj s Markom Jastrevskim, s kojim
radim na tjelesnoj građi, ili onaj s Dorom Đurkesac, s kojom
radim na vizualnom identitetu. Na svaki svoj rad gledam
kao na arhitekturu te kao takav ima više etaža podjednako
važnih da bi se postigao balans u cijelom komadu. Dirty
Dollhouse, ime pod kojim stvaram svoje radove, svijet je u
koji pozivam ljude s kojima želim dijeliti svoje poglede na
društvo i svijet te mi je zato vrlo važno da svi funkcioniramo na istoj razini.
¬ U plesnoj se teoriji često govori o oblikovanju prostora tijelom ili sintezi tijela i prostora. Koji su tvoji
pogledi na arhitektonsko oblikovanje tijelom? Koliko je
osviještena ta suradnja u tvojim radovima ili radovima
koje izvodiš?
razgovor: Ina Sladić Tijelo je, primjerice, rad Mirjane Preis u kojem sam djelovala kao izvođač. I bilo je to vrlo zanimljivo i ugodno iskustvo
svojevrsna ispitivanja arhitektonike tijela. Čast je raditi s jednom
od pionirki suvremenog plesa u Hrvatskoj. No rekla bih da sam
se arhitektonskim oblikovanjem prostora više bavila u svome
radu As the Dark Wave Swells nego u Navigating Darkness.
Dolazim iz Škole suvremenog plesa Ane Maletić u kojoj je,
preko Labanova učenja, arhitektonsko oblikovanje tijela jedan
od najvažnijih čimbenika. Mislim da je to čvrsta osnova od koje
se ne može tako lako pobjeći i ona ostaje s tobom cijeli život.
Budući da na svoj rad gledam očima dizajnera, neizbježno je
raditi na tijelu u sintezi s prostorom. Veoma sam vizualni tip,
tako da na sve što radim gledam kroz tu mrežu u prostoru.
Dakle suradnja je ne samo osviještena nego neizbježna.
¬ Misliš li da sve veći naglasak na interdisciplinarnosti
postaje trendom u izvedbenim umjetnostima?
Da, mislim da danas nemaš šanse ako kao plesač ne možeš biti glumac ili obrnuto. Vrijeme je da se sruše granice jer
ima, primjerice, divnih arhitekata koji su izvrsni koreografi.
¬ Tvoja predstava #everythingyouneedtoknow u koprodukciji s Dominom i Teatrom &TD, premijerno je izvedena
28. lipnja 2015. u Zagrebu u sklopu festivala Perforacije. O
čemu je riječ? Što to sve točno trebamo znati?
Riječ je o komadu koji se bavi ispitivanjem spektakla i
pop-kulture te pitanjem kako to prikazati na sceni. #svestotrebateznati na kraju je rađen u obliku videoigre, tretirajući prvi
dio kao upute i drugi dio kao prvu razinu. U uputama naučite
sve što trebate znati, a na prvoj razini bavim se istraživanjem
poznatog hashtaga unutar okvira poznatih programskih pogrešaka, odnosno neželjenih poruka današnje pop-kulture
tijekom cijele predstave. #svestotrebateznati planiran je kao
serija od devet razina kao devet Danteovih krugova pakla
prenesenih u suvremene živote, počevši s našom opsjednutošću Instagramom, lajkovima i žudnjom za pozornošću.
Drugu razinu počinjem raditi u jesen 2015. i planiram pojedine
razine staviti izvan kazališnih okvira (instalacija, konceptualna zabava itd.), u uskoj suradnji s Dorom Đurkesac koja je
zajedno sa mnom zaslužna za vizualni identitet cijele serije.
I to je sve što zasad trebate znati...
Dejan Košćak
rođen je u Varaždinu 1988. Studirao je
na Filozofskom fakultetu Sveučilišta u Zagrebu, na kojem je
stekao titulu prvostupnika povijesti te potom titulu magistra
povijesti umjetnosti i magistra muzeologije i upravljanja baštinom. Specijalizirao se za izvedbene umjetnosti, osobito za
izvedbenu teoriju i muzejsku obradu djela izvedbenih umjetnosti. Kao student radio je u mnogim zagrebačkim muzejima i galerijama (Muzej suvremene umjetnosti, Umjetnički
paviljon, Galerija Klovićevi dvori i dr.), a od 2014. surađuje
s umjetničkom organizacijom VRUM, za koju od 2015. radi
kao producent te koordinator platforme KLIKER. Uključen
je u rad Nomadske plesne akademije. Na sedmim Danima
suvremenog plesa – sjever vodio je razgovore s publikom
Artists Will Give You Answers.
Movements 23 | 24 _ 181
performance: Body
performance: Body < Body, Photo: Renato Branđolica >
DEJAN KOŠĆAK
Consciousness
of the Body and
Corporeality of
Consciousness
On the performance Body (Tijelo) by Mirjana Preis
I
n the performance Body1 , Mirjana Preis2 talks almost
holistically about the psychosomatic principles of
functioning of the human body. During the perfor-
1
The performance premiered on December the 8 th, 2014 at the
Zagreb Youth Theatre.
2
Mirjana Preis graduated from the School for Rhythm and Dance
in 1970, and attained a degree in comparative literature and Latin at
the Faculty of Humanities and Social Sciences in Zagreb in 1976. From
1970 until 1987 she was a member of the Studio – Contemporary
Dance Company, with which she performed in Croatia and abroad,
dancing in all of the company’s projects. She continued her dance
education in Cologne, New York, London and Paris. She attained
the status of an independent artist in 1974. Since 1987 she has been
working full-time as a dance teacher and choreographer at the Zagreb
Youth Theatre’s College. She has collaborated with the Croatian National Radiotelevision on the Pass-through Room (Prolazna soba) and
Rubato video-projects directed by Nana Šojlev, taking them to festivals in France and Germany. She contributed to the European Video
Dance Exchange with her video Suzana’s Diary (Suzanin dnevnik).
Some of these projects were broadcast via satellite as part of the art
programming of several television stations. She is the winner of the
Croatian Actors’ Guild Award for Best Play in 2004 (Kaputt) and the
professional award of the Croatian Dancers Association (UPUH) in
2012. Since 1977, she has produced numerous choreographies for the
Studio – Contemporary Dance Company, Croatian television and the
Zagreb Youth Theatre’s College: A Game (Igra, 1977), Volpone (Ben
Jonson, Split Summer festival 1977), Prelude to the Afternoon of a
Faun (Preludij za poslijepodne jednog fauna, 1979), Studio for Image
mance, the role of the protagonist is assumed by a body
which thinks, makes decisions and fulfills its needs. Every
conscious reaction, every consideration consists of itself
and its somatic counterpart, which manifests itself either
through movement or through interaction with the environment. The choreographer contemplates the duality of
the psychological and the physical, in which feelings are
(1981), Searching (Traženja, 1985), Metamorphoses (Metamorfoze,
1986, guest performance in Seoul), Birds (Ptice, 1989), Pass-through
Room (1990, guest performance in Greece), Exhibition (1991), Rubato
(1992, video screened at the Grand Prix International Video Danse
Festival in Paris and Dance Screen Festival in Frankfurt), Suzana’s
Diary (1992, Video Danse in Paris), Big iz bju;tiful (1999, guest performance in Almada), The Stolen Shoe (Ukradena cipela, 2000, Dance
and the Child International, conference in Regina, Canada), Kaputt
(2003, guest performances in Peru and Portugal), The Woman Who
Talks Too Much (Žena koja puno priča, 2005, guest performances
at the High Fest in Yerevan, in Milan, at the CIFET in Cairo), Marathon (Maraton, 2007, guest performances in Graz, Skopje, Ljubljana,
Slovakia, Sarajevo), Gyekenyes band (2008), Monster Tamer (2009,
Dance Exploration Beyond Front@ project), Move (P/okreni se, 2010,
performance of the Museum of Contemporary Art and Zagreb Youth
Theatre’s creative workshop with Desanka Virant), Leda (Miroslav
Krleža, directed by Boris Svrtan, choreographed by Mirjana Preis,
Gavella City Drama Theatre, 2011), Husband + Wife = Kitchen (Muž
+ žena = kuhinja, 2011), On the Way Up (Na putu prema gore, 2013),
Body (Tijelo, 2014).
Movements 23 | 24 _ 183
performance: Body
reflected through movement and bodily functions. As
she herself says, “Emotions emerge within the body. As
ephemeral as they seem, our emotions are created by the
movement of our muscles and the motions of our insides.
In fact, those material feelings and physical movements
are necessary for our thinking process.”
While watching this performance, it is hard not to
think of the already worn-out phrase “body language”,
but the obvious literal interpretations of that phrase
have (thankfully) been avoided. The performance itself is
inspired by a poem by Dorta Jagić3 bodywork for beginners4 :
the body sleeps.it scratches.
grows.leaks.frowns.sucks.
sits.pukes.pouts.
blinks.licks.waits.spits.
hits.chases.sighs.crackles.
blushes.tans.stands.sneezes.
opens.bends.closes.flickers.
breathes.itches.douses.rolls.
stabs.moans.empties.shivers.smells.
soils.bleeds.tears up.clots.
runs.distends.puts.arrives.climbs.releases.
treads.smokes.envelops.dances.
kneels.rises.simmers.looms.
mourns.chafes.rocks.snags.
drinks.touches.warms.offers.hides.
dries.drools.shines.spends.gives birth.descends.
crackles.drips.holds.eats.bites.
breaks.holds.radiates.moves.
undresses.closes.
leaves.
The poem describes the body in a very rhythmical
way, almost in a truncated way, and the same form was
adopted in the choreography, so Mirjana Preis, through
the body of dancer Ina Sladić, finds different states,
actions and events in which the body perceives space, the
environment, the visitors, but also its own consciousness.
The performance begins with the body, not the
performer, entering the darkened room of the Miško
Polanec hall at the Zagreb Youth Theatre, which successfully emphasizes the course and context of the performance that follows. The performance begins by playing
with parts of the body, and only after that can we see
3
Dorta Jagić, an award-winning Croatian poet, was born in Sinj in
1974. She writes poetry, short prose forms, dramatic texts and essays.
Her work was featured in numerous poetry anthologies, and her stories and poems have been translated into many languages. She is also
a theatre teacher, and a director of student troupe performances in
Zagreb.
4
Dorta Jagić, Kauč na trgu (A Couch on the Square), Biblioteka
poezije, Hrvatsko društvo pisaca, Zagreb, 2011, p. 82.
184 _ Kretanja 23 | 24
a discernible performer. This clear and decisive beginning introduces the body as the protagonist, and the
performer Ina Sladić herself sometimes anticipates it, in
moments when she leaves her “performance character”
and enters the audience, where she assumes the role of
a spectator. One of these moments interactively introduces a chosen spectator into the most intricate part of
the performance, wherein that spectator helps produce
sketches of the dancer, which are extremely important for
the later juxtaposition between two-dimensional stasis
and three-dimensional movement – Ina Sladić pauses
and marks her own body on large white papers attached
to the walls, which she later studies and puts in contrast
with more demanding dance motions. In that way she
moves out of the documented two-dimensionality of
stylized movement, and into space, exploring the full
potential of movement, and the spectator is treated to a
visual contrast which clearly communicates the interrelationship between flat and three-dimensional space. The
music could be used to build a similar dynamic, but ends
up being monotonous and uniform in certain sequences.
Through the physical sequences of the performance,
Mirjana Preis achieves a departure from the mimeticism
of stylized behavior and movement, drawing out and
emphasizing the changed physicality of the quotidian
and materializing psychological processes. Through
humorous episode the audience gets and illustration of
the physicality of certain basic processes such as falling
in love or being hungry, and which are, thanks to the
humor and charisma of Ina Sladić, communicated in a
simple and comprehensible way. Instead of set design,
this show uses architecture of the performance space,
which is fleshed out and changed over the duration of
the performance, through rolls of paper and Ina Sladić’s
body, which moves through space and reacts to it. Much
like José Gil postulates that a dancer “radiates, or generates space through his or her motions”, Mirjana Preis
choreographs an architecture of a blank black plane. Ina
Sladić, through her movements and the way she uses the
props, changes the texture of the space, and by exhaling
cigarette smoke from her body she materializes air as a
visible component of the dancing space. The space of her
body, forms which open up or draw themselves inward,
forms through which she enters space or leaves it, build
on the performance space and create a functional whole.
The body explores the paper, the floor, the steps, the
door, in a tactile manner, all the while using that same
physical material to trace inner states of consciousness.
Ultimately, Mirjana Preis has choreographed a fundamental and safe dance work which proprioceptively
explores the everyday body in a performance context.
Movements 23 | 24 _ 185
interview: Ina Sladić
interview: Ina Sladić < Body, Photo: Renato Branđolica >
DEJAN KOŠĆAK
We Don’t
Always Have to
UNDERSTAND
EVERYTHING
A Conversation with
Ina Sladić
I
na Sladić was born in Zagreb in 1986. After graduating
from the Ana Maletić School of Contemporary Dance
in Zagreb, she continued her education by receiving
a full scholarship of the Folkwang University of the Arts
(Folkwang Universität der Künste) in Essen, Germany,
where she was taught by Malou Airaudo, Lutz Förster,
Rodolpho Leonim and many others, and where she graduated in 2011. As an excellent student, she was invited
to participate in the choice of Folkwang’s new ballet
professor, and participated in an international student
exchange program at the French National Conservatory
of Music and Dance in Lyon, under the mentorship of
Anne Martin. In 2010, she participated in Pina Bausch’s
workshop on staging The Rite of Spring. Over the course
of her education, she participated in workshops headed
by Adriaan Luteijn, Matjaž Farič, Gregor Luštek, David
Zambrano, Juan Cruz Díaz de Garaio Esnaola, Dominique
Mercy, Libby Nye, Keren Levi and others. After graduating, she has collaborated with numerous artists (Xavier
Le Roy, Mårten Spångberg, Marina Abramović, Johannes
Wieland, Simone Forti, Joan Jonas, Irena Mikec, Mirjana
Preis), from 2011 till 2013 she performed as a guest dancer for Hannover’s Fredewess company, and performed,
as a guest performer, in The Princess and the Pea at Düsseldorf’s German Opera on the Rhine (Deutsche Oper
am Rhein).
Ina Sladić also creates independent projects, the most
well-known of which is Experimentallabor, which was
created in cooperation with multi-media artists and presented in 2012 at the Documenta (13) in Kassel. With the
support of the Culture Department of Wuppertal and the
Kunstkomplex gallery she created the pieces In Between,
3.14, Zimmer 109, Room 18, Bangpainting and Body as
An Instrument of Pain. In 2013 she was first assistant
in the production team of the Days of Contemporary
Dance festival in Varaždin, where she performed Navigating Darkness in 2014. She performed the same piece
as part of the Nomad On the Road project at the IKS
Movements 23 | 24 _ 187
Festival in Split in 2013. As first assistant to Sanja Tropp
Frühwald, she participated in the production of the No
Logo Opera(tion) performance of the VRUM collective
and the kainkollektiv. The 100 Years of Paranoia project,
a collaboration with Eberhard Kranemann (Kraftwerk,
Neu!, Fritz Müller), was presented in 2014 at the 10th
International Directors Lounge Festival in Berlin, and
her latest piece #allyouneedtoknow (#sveštotrebateznati)
was created at the Domino residence as part of the Perforations (Perforacije) Festival.
¬ Shall we start our conversation with your assessment of the state of dance education in Croatia?
It is much better than it was when I was leaving. My
departure abroad was almost exclusively a consequence
of the fact that there were no options for continuing
my education in Croatia. A positive side of it was that
I belonged to one of the luckier generations of the Ana
Maletić School of Contemporary Dance, which had the
opportunity to participate in numerous workshops and
extracurricular programs organized by the school. Additionally, that was a time when people started coming
back from academies abroad, so I was lucky to have the
chance to work under six different teachers and in six
different techniques over the course of my high-school.
I left school with a pretty varied knowledge of a large
scope of things, and an in-depth knowledge of Laban,
which provides you with exceptional spatial awareness.
I can see that Croatia currently has a strong non-institutional education in dance studios which do not have
the official status of a dance school. I have recently had
my first contact with the Academy1 when working on
the Hunting Family 2 performance, and I have noticed
several student performers who have great potential. That
is all I know about the Academy, since I haven’t had the
opportunity to learn about it in detail, but I know it has
very high-quality lecturers. The level of dance education
is more than solid, at least from my perspective.
¬ What were the perceptions of those around you
when it came to your decision to dance in a professional capacity?
I was lucky to have parents who were very supportive,
and I was always strong and didn’t pay much heed to
typical Croatian question such as: “okay, but what do you
do for a living?” I think that question elicited a defiant
reaction in me, so I really enjoy telling these people: “I
dance!” Luckily, people always seemed to support and
1
Undergraduate program in contemporary dance at the Academy
of Dramatic Art in Zagreb.
188 _ Kretanja 23 | 24
approve of what I was doing. If we step out of the world
of theatre, it is hard to expect that people will really
understand what it is that we do. But that is not just in
Croatia, it is like that everywhere. Germany is a different
story because work in culture is considered a part of
tradition, so when I say that I graduated at the Folkwang,
everyone considers it an elite profession.
¬ When the time came for further professionalization and specialization after high-school, who or what
informed your decision when choosing your next
school? You graduated at the Folkwang University
of the Arts.
Pina Bausch. Not just her, but she definitely had a
lot of influence on me making this choice. I remember
that I only knew that I wanted to dance. I really had no
idea what I wanted to dance, until I accidentally saw a
television feature on Pina Bausch and became completely
mesmerized by her language. The fact that a dance performance can also contain text and elements of theatre
made me fall in love with dance theatre, which is also
very present in my own work. The fact that I would
spend the next four years working with her dancers, and
with her personally (when I arrived at the academy, Pina
Bausch was still alive), made me so happy that I didn’t
care where the school was.
¬ After graduating from the Folkwang, what were
your first work experiences and projects on which
you worked?
I was lucky that Xavier Le Roy and Mårten Spångberg
took me on board for their Production project as soon
as I auditioned in May 2011, so two months before my
graduation. That meant that I received my degree on the
3rd of July, and started working on the 5th. Working with
them was wonderful. While I was still engaged in this
project, I auditioned for the Fredewess dance company in
Hannover, where they offered me a contract immediately,
and where I stayed as a guest dancer until 2013. After the
academy, I worked non-stop for the next eight months.
In 2012 I got my first job working for Marina Abramović,
so things were happening pretty fast for me, which is a
wonderful thing for an independent artist.
¬ During his or her education, how much time and
space does a dance performer have, after mastering
the basic dance techniques, to develop his or her
personal expression?
I believe that a dance academy works just like any
other art education. I believe that no school is perfect and
that the quality of high education varies from person to
interview: Ina Sladić person – everybody has the same opportunities and the
same freedom. You get as much as you ask for. It might
sound harsh, but it is true. You cannot develop your own
dance expression just through working in the studio. The
studio is where you work on your technique. But developing your expression is something that is done through
living. Through exploring, reading books, watching movies, and especially watching performances (I have always
gone to every performance I heard of ), because that is
where you develop your own vocabulary. So I believe
that you develop your dance expression outside the studio more than within it. Dance technique is something
completely different than dance expression. In school,
you get an overview of the things that happen out there,
and the tools through which you can look for your own
language. Technique is the basis and a tool to build one’s
own language, and developing a dance expression – a
language of dance – is a very personal thing for me, and
something you always find the time for. In the end,
it might end up having nothing in common with the
techniques you learned during your education.
¬ You have worked on several projects with different artists in Croatia and abroad; you are currently
involved in both. How tight are the networks between
choreographers and dancers in Croatia and abroad?
Just as tight as they need to be. Networking is nowadays one of the most important tools for accomplishing
goals. As much as we want to pretend that it isn’t, it is.
Networking is the tool of our century, and we simply
need to adapt to it. A talent for networking has nothing
to do with artistic talent. We need to be talented for both,
and sometimes that is not the case. On the art scene
you nowadays have to function as a small business, and
everyone is a product. In order for your product to be
noticed, you have to sell it!
¬ In your experience, what would be the optimal
form of collaboration between a choreographer and a
dancer? How autonomous is a dancer when performing another person’s choreography? How hard is it
to balance out two intertwined dance expressions in
a collaborative effort?
I think it really depends on the type of collaboration.
There are dancers and there are dance artists. The world
needs both. Dancers work with choreographers who present their ideas and movements, and the dancers interpret
them. Dance artists on the other hand like to collaborate
with choreographers, preferring work in collectives in
which everyone has the right to present their own ideas. I
spent two years in a company in Hannover in the capacity
of a dancer. I literally copied the moves of the choreographer and his assistant into my body and my character. But
it didn’t fulfill me, so I started creating my own pieces. In
performance theatre it is a bit different, which is one of
the main reasons I fell in love with it. With Le Roy and
Spångberg I performed these ideas as Ina, not just as a
body interpreting someone else’s language. Interpreting
other people’s languages interests me only if I have the
freedom to seek something of my own within it. At the
kainkollektiv, where I currently work, I have a complete
freedom to look for my own dance vocabulary within
other people’s directorial framework, and that is a setting
in which I function very well.
¬ Is it common for a choreographer to use dancers
as a neutral medium, using them merely to take his
forms and repeat them on stage?
It depends on the type of theatre. It is common with
choreographers who function within an institution, and
with choreographers who have a strong personal expression. This is a hard question to answer without thinking
of strong choreographers, for example, those that work in
the body-mind centering technique, wherein a performer’s body is transposed into the choreographer’s language,
although not in the way we expect it to. It is hard not to
think of Sasha Waltz, who has recently exhibited a strong
repetitive dance vocabulary.
¬ While we are talking about taking on forms
and repetition, where do you place yourself on the
spectrum between a practiced and choreographed
performance and a form that is liberated through
improvisation?
I create a framework that I can change at any time;
my structure is open to change.
¬ How do audiences react to practiced performances, and how do they react to improvisations? Can they
even tell the difference?
Of course they can, in certain cases, if the form disappears, the audience gets lost, they lose concentration.
Personally, I think that certain unexpected moments have
to be anticipated in the dramaturgy, in order to capture
the audience’s attention, but if a performer can do it
without a planned structure, more power to them. But
not everyone can do it.
¬ In which moments and collaborations did you
notice the greatest development of your own dance
gestures (was it solo performances, collaborations,
your own creative work)?
Movements 23 | 24 _ 189
If I replace the term dance gesture with the term performing power or dance vocabulary, then the answer is
definitely Marina Abramović, my own creative work and
the kainkollektiv, which are the forms I still function
within. With Marina Abramović (Luminosity and Centerpiece) I became stronger by understanding the concept
of performing power in the act of existing itself; in my
own creative work I learned of the power of personal
exploration of theatre vocabulary, and at the kainkollektiv
I felt the power of the individual within a given stage
framework with twelve other company members.
¬ You say that working with Marina Abramović
was very important for your artistic development.
In fact, you are one of very few artists who passed an
audition and performed a piece by Marina Abramović. How did that happened? What was the audition like and what did Marina Abramović ask of the
performers?
An acquaintance of mine happened to send me an
e-mail informing me of her audition. At the time, I was
pretty obsessed with her, I bought all her books and
studied her work, so I thought I had to go and audition.
I was in Hannover at the theatre and I had a performance
on the very day of the audition, but I still decided to go.
I told the troupe I would be gone for the day, I caught a
train and took a three-hour journey to the town where
the audition was held. There were around three hundred people at the audition, and we were told that we
could audition for two different performances, Marina
Abramović and Revolving Door, but I only wanted her.
The audition was simple, they didn’t ask for our names,
they just handed us numbers and lined us up in files of
twenty girls. The audition was conducted by Rebecca
Davis, Marina Abramović’s assistant, who told us to keep
our arms in three different poses, for five minutes each.
So, we spent fifteen minutes in total focusing on a particular spot, until she told us “now”, and at that moment
we had to look her in the eye. And that was that. After
that, we left our contact information and left. That was
when I met Snežana Golubović, another one of Marina
Abramović’s assistants. Some three days later, I woke up
at seven in the morning and saw an e-mail entitled “Yes”.
The message said: “Dear Ina, I’m happy that Marina has
chosen you to perform her piece.” The audition was in
March, and the performance was in August, which gave
me enough time to prepare and decide whether I wanted
to take part in it. Before the audition, they didn’t tell us
what the piece was; when we came there, they told us
that it could only be performed by a woman and that
she would have to be naked.
190 _ Kretanja 23 | 24
¬ How many people passed the first audition?
At first they picked just three women, but later they
realized that they couldn’t fill an entire exhibition with
just the three of us, so they invited three more girls, who
had performed Imponderabilia at Art Basel the previous
year, to join the cast of Luminosity. After the initial euphoria you start thinking realistically; can I do this, naked,
several meters above the ground? And then you get into a
state of mind in which it is all right. When the rehearsals
started, we did chi gong strength exercises, listened to
the New York Radio Lab podcast, a science show about
human limits called Limits, we did something nonsensical
every day; for meditation we separated red from black
lentils, and when we were done, after two hours, we
would mix them up again and start over. Similarly, we
practiced silence and things like that.
¬ How did the audience react to your performance
during the exhibition?
It varied. The first person to come to my performance was t he mot her of my partner at t he time.
That was hardest for me, when people I knew came
in. There was always some discomfort. Perhaps the
worst experience was when a child ran into the room
and stopped and stared at me, only to have his father
show up and cover his eyes. I t hink t hat, by doing
so, the father formed a certain fear and repugnance
to what he was seeing, as if it were a bad thing. That
was a traumatizing, conditioned reaction. But, except
for that, people reacted well. They often told me, after
the performance, that they were surprised I was so
small, because I look bigger during the performance.
There were wonderful people who gave me energy, but
around seventy percent of the people actually drained
energy from me, it was very exhausting. The journalists
were quite unpleasant, they wanted to keep filming
after the press conference, and, what was probably
the worst, they placed a photograph of a colleague of
mine on the cover of the German Bild under the title
Peep Show at the Museum, after which a visitor came up
in front of that colleague and started masturbating. In
those situations, we had a lot of help from the security
guards, who developed a fatherly relationship towards
us and took care of our safety. When there were no
visitors, they would tell us to relax and that they would
let us know if someone from the next room was headed
towards us. But, when I was alone I had to work the
hardest, because if I relaxed, my level would drop. The
performance goes on even when there is no audience
in the room, because if you leave that frame of mind,
you cannot come back into it.
interview: Ina Sladić ¬ When are you at your most creative? What
inspires you in dance?
I don’t think about when I am at my most creative.
In the morning? On my vacation? I am probably at my
most creative when I am in my own chaos. A lot of things
inspire me. Jean-Luc Godard, visiting a city for the first
time, literature, blogs, in the last couple of years I have
gotten intensively into photography, especially Wolfgang
Tillmans; people on train stations, children, clubs, friends,
Forced Entertainment, Henry Purcell, Marlene Dietrich,
Bette Davis, Lars von Trier, Karl Lagerfeld.
¬ Does your work as a dancer involve research, or
theoretical work? To what extent is academic dance
theory available to dancers?
Absolutely. Theoretical work is very important to
me. Those are my favorite moments. Entering a library
and finding three books that tackle the same topic I am
working on, or reading an article in Dazed & Confused
that tackles the same theme, watching Sunset Boulevard
from 1950 and finding in it fragments of a theme I am
interested in, talking to a computer programmer who is
currently working on a game while I am trying to stage
something similar – without things like that, there is no
point in entering a studio. That is a part of Pina Bausch’s
work – if you do not have an inspiring life outside of
theatre, what can you show in theatre? Live! Live! Live!
“Life’s a banquet and most poor suckers are starving to
death”, as Auntie Mame says.
¬ Boris Groys sees the performing arts as a practice
of art. Is there room for theory in the performing
arts? Which of your artistic processes include something more than a purely practical performing aspect?
Theory is always present in the performing arts. I
love creating characters on stage and balancing between
them. Life itself is a theory of the performing arts. As
much of a cliché as that is, it is not a cliché without
a reason. Sometimes I spend hours looking at video
clips of Forced Entertainment on YouTube, sometimes
I spend hours exploring the Freunde von Freunden blog,
which provides me with insight into the apartments
of interesting people. Architecture inspires me greatly.
I love working with photographs, so I often look for
photographs and analyze them, looking for indications
of movement. I love the Flemish masters and I often
find inspiration in 15th century paintings, looking for
atmosphere for a piece. I write a lot. Constantly. That
is also a large part of my theoretical research. I never
leave my apartment without my little black notebook
and pen.
¬ When you think about your own work, can you
identify a primary sphere of interest that you work
on or actively try to develop?
I think that I at one point described it as a laboratory
of spectacle. At the moment, I am very interested in spectacle and our role in it. Not so much with reality shows
as much as our desire for going higher, better, more interesting. Everybody strives to be seen, to be important.
Some people get there by reading the gossip pages, while
others put an extreme amount of effort into becoming
important with their brilliant ideas on Instagram. I try
to balance between the extremes. All vs. Nothing. I am
inspired by the influence of social media on our contemporary lives. I explore the inability of an individual to
fully empathize with others in the context of a society of
spectacle, where empathy is replaced by illusions and a
simulation of contact through various media technologies.
It is an exploration of our need for someone who will
save us from the anxiety of our century.
¬ Your work is pretty interdisciplinary; you have
done several performances, including a repeat performance of Marina Abramović, you were involved in the
contemporary baroque opera/dance performance No
Logo Opera(tion) as a production assistant and narrator in the performance, you have performed your
own solo performances as well as performances for
other choreographers. How hard is it to find your own
expression and vocabulary in various performance
formats? What specifics of artistic work cropped up
in different performance forms?
It is difficult for me to identify just one. I consider
myself to be a performer and I believe that a good performer must be capable of crossing over between many
forms. I do not find it that different to perform Marina
Abramović’s Centerpiece than to be a narrator, sitting in a
chair for an hour and a half, the duration of the play. I am
a performer, no matter what I do. In No Logo Opera(tion)
I was a production assistant, as well as assistant to the
director and stage performer. That also makes sense in
a way. Theatre is theatre, on stage or behind the scenes.
That is the only thing that has always been important for
me, to be in theatre. Although, museums and galleries
have started sharing that place with theatre. If you are
an artist in 2015, it is very difficult to anchor yourself in
just one practice. Everybody knows I am a workaholic,
so the only thing that matters is that I work. Wherever
you put me, I will find my own way.
¬ Speaking of the performer’s emission of content
and its absorption by the audience, how do you per-
Movements 23 | 24 _ 191
ceive the (rather common in dance) departure from
narration and the transition into the abstract form?
How does the audience react to such a switch in focus,
how informed and ready is the Croatian audience
to interpret the abstract, to interpret motion as a
medium?
Personally, I do not like to separate forms into the
narrative and the abstract. In my theatre, anything goes.
I haven’t been focused exclusively on the dance form for
a long while now. I am currently not interested in it. I
do not like to label and sort forms in boxes, classifying
them as something they have to be. I think we all have
enough imagination to understand every performance
the way we want to understand it. The beauty of it all
might be precisely the fact that we don’t always have
to understand everything. Croatian audiences are used
to conceptual work because it has been present on the
scene for a long while. The problem with the Croatian
scene is that theatre professionals stage performances for theatre professionals. At least that was how it
has been up until now. Everything changes with time,
and that is great, but I sometimes have a feeling that
people who are not directly involved in theatre do not
want to attend dance performances because they feel
left out. Contemporary dance is difficult to understand
even for the artists themselves, much less for someone
who cannot even understand the first sentence in the
program booklet. It is nice to be an intellectual, but we
sometimes have to remember the fact that art for art’s
sake comes with consequences which we have to bear.
After all, theatre has waited for a long time to become
a public space, so that everyone can enjoy it. And now
we are going back to it being reserved for a specific
population.
¬ Since we’re on the subject of audiences, could we
claim that the audience constructs the performance,
much like a reader, according to certain theories, constructs a literary work? Is the watcher’s interpretation
more important that the artist’s intention?
Can we claim that the audience constructs a performance? Absolutely. When I create my pieces, I always
leave at least one part as a structured improvisation which
gives me plenty of freedom within my framework, and
every audience finds something different in it. Every
time the energy and atmosphere of the audience lends
a different color, so to speak, to what I am doing. Is the
intention or the interpretation more important? I think
neither is more important; I have my story but I do not
want the viewers to have the same story as I do. I want
them to interpret my story in their own way.
192 _ Kretanja 23 | 24
¬ Don’t you want your and their interpretation to
overlap?
No, I want them to make their own story, because I
think that is more interesting to them. Similar to that, I
could point to my experience with Navigating Darkness,
which is about my fear of the dark. It was really brilliant
to see and hear all those people who came up to me after
the performance and admitted that they are afraid of the
dark as well. They found my confession that I still look
under the bed before I go to sleep to be brave. Freud
considers a fear of the dark among adults to be the first
sign of schizophrenia, so people take it to heart when I
talk publicly about my fear. In my pieces I do a lot of
work on the personal level.
¬ When it comes to interpreting what is seen, Erika Fischer-Lichte thinks that during a performance,
interpretation is not possible; only the experience of
what was seen. Do you also think that interpretation
comes afterwards, that the artistic event itself is first
experienced, and only then analyzed?
Yes, it does come later, on both sides. I think the artists likewise interpret their audiences afterwards, because
you are too immersed in the performance while you are
performing. Take, for example, my performance Room
109 which lasted three hours. I built a white room within
the gallery and decorated it like a waiting room. A friend
of mine from Kraftwerk composed a score for it, and it
was interrupted every fifteen minutes by a voice saying:
“Please, wait!” Every audience member got a questionnaire on their seats, and instead of tickets each of them
got a number. The room was built so that my shadow,
but not those of the visitors, was reflected on three of
its walls. They entered one by one with filled-out questionnaires, which were comprised of questions such as
“if you were in a band you would be…” or “from the
following list of films, the one I enjoy most is…”, which
was interesting to read afterwards, but it was first and
foremost a means for me to track the number of visitors.
I photographed every visitor and asked them two things:
first, what it is that they do really well (and that is not
work-related), and people often had to stop and think
hard about it; and second, what it is that they would
like to do on stage, but are embarrassed to do in front of
people. They usually wanted to shout loudly, I don’t know
why, so we shouted together; I did with them whatever
it was that they wanted to do, but louder than them,
so the visitors who were waiting outside didn’t know
what was going on. One visitor wanted to have a glass
of champagne, so I went to the local bar and returned
with some champagne.
interview: Ina Sladić ¬ Do you think that you tested their limits in that
way, by giving them complete freedom which they
didn’t use?
Yes, I gave them freedom, but when you are alone
in a room with someone… I don’t know, everyone was
polite and kind.
¬ How do you perceive the relationship with the
audience during a performance? What does the audience give to the artist, and what can it get from him
or her in return?
Navigating Darkenss was staged in Varaždin, I decided
to film my performance, because I have to have a tape for
festivals, so that was very practical. The video crew taped
the performance on its own, without an audience, and
everything went fine, but that same crew later attended
a public performance, in front of an audience, and they
told me I was much better, that the videotaped performance was nowhere near as good as the one in front of
the audience. Even though I knew I was being filmed
and that my performance would be documented, I was
five times worse than when I saw the audience that later
came to see my performance and that gave me the energy
to be more creative in that moment.
¬ So, you draw your energy from the audience?
Yes; generally speaking, I am very disciplined because
I come from a classical ballet background2 , but I couldn’t
do it without an audience.
¬ And what do you give them in return?
Well, I think I give them a sort of energy as well, one
that enables them to experience themselves in another
way. I like to go to the theatre as well, I like sitting back
comfortably in my seat, but that is not what I want from
my audience. Through individual and intimate stories
and the forms I perform, I make the audience enter my
performance. I think that it is something that touches
everyone; that may be a clumsy way of putting it, but
as soon as you give something personal, the audience
feels it, every one of us has something personal we can
relate to. I think that is something very important at
this time, that the audience can relate to what they are
seeing on the stage. We simply live in that sort of age,
there is another level of awareness and people want to
2
Before enrolling in the Ana Maletić School of Contemporary
Dance, Ina Sladić attended the School for Classical Ballet in Zagreb
(from 1990 until 1995). Her education at the Folkwang University of
the Arts was also focused on classical techniques, so she has taken
more classes in ballet than in contemporary dance techniques.
relate; they do not want to see supermen, they just want
to see humans.
¬ When you did Luminosity, Marina Abramović
took a typical scopophilic position of a male observer looking at a naked female artist and confronted
it with your gaze looking firmly back at them. How
does an audience, especially a male one, react to that
sort of shift in perspective, to the fact that, during
the performance they themselves can become the
object of observation?
That shift in perspective, and, more generally, the
theme of direct observation may be one of the most
important elements of that piece. I watched some people
for as much as half an hour, especially if there were many
people there, because I couldn’t change my point of view
often. It is difficult to look even at familiar people, but I
was in some altered state so it wasn’t important. Women
may have felt more uncomfortable, perhaps because they
can relate and understand how physically challenging
my posture was. The men felt most uncomfortable when
they were looking at me observing someone else, and
I looked directly at them at that moment. That always
threw them off balance. But basically there weren’t any
negative experiences. The men tried to look me in the
eye, attempting to restrict their gaze to my eyes. They
really tried to be discrete.
¬ Contemporary performance art pieces are
sometimes too conceptual or too mystified for the
audiences, so opening up the artistic process and
allowing insight into it can greatly facilitate the communication between artists and spectators. Do you
reveal your artistic process to the audience, and in
what way (before, during or after the creation and
performance)?
In my new project #everythingyouneedtoknow the
artistic process is revealed as it is created – visually,
through social media. On my Tumblr page (http://hashtageverythingyouneedtoknow.tumblr.com/) you can find
all the materials used in the project, as well as my inspirations and the inspirations of Dora Đurkesac, the visual
artist I am working with, and through this we construct
the meaning of the entire play. We will soon display our
work in progress at the feedback workshop of the &TD
Theatre, so the process is further opened up in that way,
inviting the audience’s open criticism.
¬ For example, Peggy Phelan thinks that a performance is ephemeral, which is in fact its essence. Amelia Jones somewhat agrees with this claim, because for
Movements 23 | 24 _ 193
her, a performance by its nature belongs to the past
and any sort of documenting marks the contradiction
between a live performance and the commodification
of an artistic event through the materialization of a
performance. How do you feel about documenting
performances? Can they really be experienced indirectly, through photographs or video?
That is a difficult question. We could also ask why
Marina Abramović is looking for performers for a re-performance of her piece. For me, that is also a form of documenting a performance. As a professional dancer, I am
bored to death when I watch a video of a performance,
as the essence of being present, which is crucial for me,
is lost. It is the same as when we asked Rebecca Davis
why they chose us at the audition, and she told us that
the key moment was when we looked at her at her mark;
at that moment, it was a feeling just like the one when
you kiss someone for the first time. She said that some
people just have it in them, while others don’t. That was
her definition and we were fine with it; it wasn’t really
exact, but we didn’t mind.
¬ Do you feel that a documented performance has
any artistic aura?
Well, I found it interesting and exciting to see the
chair on which Marina Abramović performed Rhythm II
at the Museum of Contemporary Art. On the other hand,
I find it interesting to watch videos of her on YouTube.
I think documentation is important because a performance is only temporary, but it is difficult to get the
same feeling based on documents alone. For a historical
context, it is fine.
¬ So, you see documenting more as archival work
than as an opportunity for an audience to experience
a performance in that way?
Absolutely. I would love to see a videotape of Shakespeare’s plays performed in his time, although I know
that I wouldn’t be having the same experience as the
people who were there at the time.
¬ What is your take on the state of contemporary
dance? Is there any progress, can you sense some
changes coming?
Contemporary means something that is currently going
on. So it is silly to talk about progress. Of course there’s
progress, every day. Contemporary is something connected to the here and now, not something that was going
on in 2012. That is a thing of the past, it is no longer
contemporary. Changes are always going on, and currently
it feels like there is a tendency towards erasing boundaries
194 _ Kretanja 23 | 24
between disciplines and merging the disciplines, so that
there wouldn’t be any need to talk about actors and dancers, but simply performers, all of which are particularly
skilled at something, but function homogenously on stage.
¬ What does performance art give you that you
couldn’t achieve in dance or another medium?
Personal transformation, without a doubt.
¬ You often work abroad, travel to Germany, and
you are currently in Poland. Are there differences
between the status of dance on the European market and on the domestic one? How well-developed is
dance as a cultural product?
The biggest difference is that abroad, dance has existed
for a longer time within the framework of educational
and theatric institutions. I think that dancing is more
respected as a profession, even though dance art has a
very rich tradition in Croatia. Taking into account our
historical context, the priorities were different. But we
are where we are today, and perceptions of dance as a
profession and cultural product are changing. In fact,
in the last four or five years, I have a feeling that, especially in Zagreb, it is very fashionable to be involved in
contemporary dance, especially among twenty-five- to
thirty-five-year-olds, which is great.
¬ Where can you go in such a physical medium
when the body gets worn out – gets injured or ages?
How pronounced is this type of uncertainty in your
professional engagement?
I do not feel it that much because I come from a
background where Nazareth Panadero, at sixty years of
age, is still the most interesting performer. Dominique
Mercy is sixty-five and still dances in Café Müller. Marina
Abramović, at the age of sixty-nine, still performs physically exhausting pieces. Because of that, I do not fear
my body growing old. I think performers become more
powerful as the age. If I had stayed in classical ballet, I
probably would be thinking of it, but the way things
are, I think there is no need for that. Of course, I am
also consciously preparing for this at master workshops
where I work more on the textual side, which is also very
interesting to me. Life is unpredictable and can bring you
anything. What is important is that I keep developing.
Which way my development will take me, I still don’t
know. I am still searching for my path.
¬ In a previous interview you mentioned the “experience map of your body”. What does that map look
like now and how much has it changed?
interview: Ina Sladić The experience map of my body. I would say it changes with every new project, with every new experience.
New information is added, older is erased. Important
things stay with me, and things that were transient or
only important for a specific period are erased from the
map to create space for new ones. If I said that a year
ago, I have changed a great deal since then.
¬ You often end up in the DJ booth after your performances. What is your professional relationship
towards music in the context of original compositions for a particular piece? We have talked about the
collaboration between choreographers and dancers;
what does collaboration between a composer and a
performer/choreographer look like?
Music is extremely important in my work. The collaboration between a composer and a performer, or
author in this case, is very similar, if not the same, as
that between a performer and a choreographer. Working
with Popsimonova on the music for #allyouneedtoknow
was on the same level as the work on physical material I
did with Marko Jastrevski, or the work on visual identity
with Dora Đurkesac. I see all of my work as architecture;
as such, it consists of several layers of equal importance
for the balance of the entire piece. Dirty Dollhouse, the
moniker under which I create, is a world into which I
invite the people with whom I want to share my views
on society and the world, so it is very important that we
all function on the same level.
¬ In dance theory, there is often talk about shaping
space with your body, or the synthesis of body and
space. What are your views on body architecture?
How conscious is that kind of collaboration in your
pieces or the pieces you perform?
Body (Tijelo) is, for example, a piece of Mirjana Preis
that I performed. It was a very interesting and pleasant
experience of exploring the architecture of the body. It
was an honor to work with one of the pioneers of Croatian
contemporary dance. But I would say that architecture of
space was a topic that was more present in my piece As
the Dark Wave Swells than in Navigating Darkness. I am a
student of the Ana Maletić School of Contemporary Dance,
where, following Laban’s teaching, body architecture is
one of the most important factors. I think that it is a firm
foundation which you can’t really escape that easily; it
stays with you your whole life. Because I look at my work
through the eyes of a designer, working on the body in
synthesis with space is inevitable. I am a very visual person, so everything I do is situated in this special network.
So, the collaboration is not only conscious, but inevitable.
¬ Do you think that the emphasis on interdisciplinary work is becoming a trend in the performing arts?
Yes, I think that today you don’t stand a chance as
a dancer who cannot act or vice versa. It is time to tear
down these boundaries. For example, there are wonderful
architects who are great choreographers.
¬ Your performance #everythingyouneedtoknow,
in co-production with Domino and the &TD Theatre,
premiered on June 28th, 2015 in Zagreb, as part of
the Perforations Festival. What is it about? What is
it exactly that we need to know?
It is a piece that examines spectacle and pop-culture,
and the issue of presenting all that on the stage. #allyouneedtoknow ultimately takes the form of a videogame,
whereby the first part consists of instructions, and the
second as the first level of the game. The instructions tell
you all you need to know, and the first level explores a
familiar hash-tag within the framework of well-known
programming errors, or unwanted messages of modern
pop culture throughout the piece. #allyouneedtoknow is
planned as a series of nine levels, like Dante’s nine layers
of Inferno transposed into contemporary life, starting
with our obsession with Instagram, likes and lust for
attention. Work on the second level will start in the fall
of 2015, and I plan to stage certain levels outside the theatrical framework (as installations, concept parties etc.),
working closely with Dora Đurkesac who is, together
with me, responsible for the visual identity of the entire
series. And that is all you need to know – for now.
Dejan Košćak was born in Varaždin in 1988. He studied
at the Faculty of Humanities and Social Sciences in Zagreb,
where he attained his Bachelor’s Degree in History, and a
Master’s Degree in Art History, museology and heritage management. He specialized in the performing arts, especially
in performance theory and the treatment of the performing
arts in museology. As a student, he worked in many museums and galleries in Zagreb (The Museum of Contemporary
Art, The Art Pavilion, the Klovićevi Dvori Gallery, etc), and
since 2014 he has been collaborating with the VRUM art
organization; since 2015, he has been working there as a
producer and the coordinator of the KLIKER platform. He is
involved in the work of the Nomad Dance Academy. At the
7th Days of Contemporary Dance – North (Dani suvremenog
plesa – sjever), he moderated a series of open discussions with
audience members entitled Artists Will Give You Answers.
Movements 23 | 24 _ 195
predstave: Varijacije o osjetnom i
Nečastive
196 _ Kretanja 23 | 24
predstave: Varijacije o osjetnom i Nečastive < Nečastive, Foto: Imre Kővágó Nagy >
JELENA MIHELČIĆ
O izloženosti
i trajanju
O predstavama Varijacije o osjetnom Marjane Krajač i
Nečastive Brune Isakovića
N
a izvedbama recentnijih durativnih predstava Marjane Krajač i Brune Isakovića gledatelj ne samo da
je prisutan nego sudjeluje na osobit način koji nije
uobičajeno interaktivan. Iako je zapravo riječ o tradicionalno
postavljenu odnosu gledatelja i izvođača u kojemu gledatelji
sjede i promatraju, a izvođači se kreću, odnosno izvode neku
akciju i bivaju promatrani. U obaju autora zanimljiv je pomak
žarišta između promatrača i promatranoga koji se zamagljuje,
ne iščezava potpuno, ali ga postajemo svjesniji. Oboje autora
uspijeva, iako im to nije primarna namjera, navesti gledatelja
da doslovno osjeti svoje tijelo u odnosu na tijela izvođača, da
uoči čimbenike prostora, vremena te njihovo kretanje, odnosno trajanje. Oboje autora uključuju i gledatelja i njegovu
izloženost. Iako se to na nesvjesnoj razini događa u svakoj
plesnoj predstavi, ovdje samo toga postajemo svjesniji.
Marjana Krajač još u Koreografskoj fantaziji br. 11 , a
posebno u Varijacijama o osjetnom2 , naglašava izloženost
1
Koreografska fantazija br. 1 nastala je suradnjom s Umjetničkim paviljonom u Zagrebu, Hrvatskim institutom za pokret i ples,
Zagrebačkim plesnim centrom i plesnim centrom Tanzfabrik/Uferstudios u Berlinu. Premijera: 21. studenoga 2013. u Umjetničkom
paviljonu. Koncept i koreografija: Marjana Krajač. Izvode: Lana
Hosni, Irena Mikec, Katarina Rilović, Irena Tomašić, Mia Zalukar.
Suradnja na projektu: Hrvoje Hiršl; oblikovanje kostima: Link / Ogi
Antunac i Zoran Mrvoš; oblikovanje materijala: Valentina Toth;
tonska tehnika: Miroslav Piškulić; tehnički direktor projekta: Duško
Richtermoc; tehnička asistencija: Leonardo Krakić; komunikacija:
Anita Klapan.
2
Premijera: 18. listopada 2014. u Domu HDLU-a, Galerija Bačva.
Koncept i koreografija: Marjana Krajač. Izvode: Lana Hosni, Irena
kao ideju. Izloženost izvođačica na danjem svjetlu Galerije
Bačva, u dvoipolsatnoj meditaciji o pokretu i osvještavanju
odnosa tijela u prostoru, odnosa izvođača samih sa sobom,
s publikom i obrnuto. Dok promatramo izvođačice u postupnom uranjanju u osjećanje tijela, od minimalnih pokreta
zglobova do jednostavnih pokreta pojedinih dijelova tijela,
kao da ispituju njihove mogućnosti, preko sve intenzivnijih
ulaženja u prostor, zatim međusobnih kontakata i tako dalje
sve do ponovnog umirenja – i mi kao gledatelji postajemo
osjetilno otvorenijima. Produljenje izvedbenog vremena i vremena promatranja tijela u pokretu neizbježno nas postupno
usmjerava k promatranju različitih detalja toga događanja.
Također i samih sebe, našeg vlastita ulaženja i izlaženja iz
događanja, u vlastito tijelo i u vlastite misli koje i odlutaju
pa se opet usredotoče na događanja na sceni i tako dalje –
variraju. Mi kao gledatelji sudjelujemo u izvedbi tako što
prolazimo neki sličan proces kao i izvođačice.
Izloženost se može ovdje promatrati i na način da nema
teatralnosti, scene u tradicionalnom smislu. Izvođačice se
kreću pod danjim svjetlom, u varijacijama na temu svakodnevne odjeće, bijele košulje i plavih kratkih hlača, i publika je
pozvana sudjelovati u njihovoj transformaciji. Nema ulaženja
i izlaženja iz scenskog prostora, sve je vidljivo. Bijeli kvadratni
Mikec, Katarina Rilović, Irena Tomašić, Mia Zalukar. Oblikovanje grafičkih materijala: Valentina Toth; urednik publikacije:
Igor Marković; fotografija: Damir Žižić; tehnički direktor: Duško
Richtermoc; tehnika zvuka: Miroslav Piškulić; asistencija: Leonardo
Krakić; komunikacija: Anita Klapan. Produkcija: Sodaberg koreografski laboratorij.
Movements 23 | 24 _ 197
predstave: Varijacije o osjetnom i Nečastive
plesni pod unutar kružnog prostora galerije potpuno je otvoren i ne skriva ništa. Riječ je o jednoj vrsti kontrolirane improvizacije pred publikom ili, bolje reći, ulaska u proces rada na
tijelu. Kada osjete umor, izvođačice sjednu, legnu ili izađu iz
kvadratnog polja te se naslanjaju na zid galerije. Imamo pred
sobom živo tkanje, isprepletanje razina osjetljivosti na ples.
Gledatelji možda i mogu izaći i otići u bilo kojem trenutku,
ali predstava je namijenjena njihovoj dugotrajnoj prisutnosti
i nekom svjedočenju plesačkoj izloženosti.
Izvođačice vlastitu osjetilnost ubrzo proširuju na prostor
oko sebe, zrcaleći ga vlastitim tijelom. Promatrajući ih pozornije, nakon nekog vremena mogu se uočiti slični pokreti ili slični
principi koje preuzimaju jedna od druge. Nije riječ o kopiranju,
nego neizbježnom otvaranju na utjecaje jedne prema drugoj.
Nakon nekog vremena dolazi do tjelesnog kontakta koji varira
od opipavanja kože ili kose, preko štipanja, pljeskanja, do sve
intenzivnijih kontakata, primjerice valjanja jedne preko druge,
guranja, oslanjanja, navlačenja, različitih osjećaja težine tijela.
Nakon usredotočenosti na same sebe, preko njegova širenja na
druge osobe u prostoru, njihov utjecaj i fizičko približavanje,
u posljednjoj trećini predstave žarište se premješta na osjećaj
prostora i geometriju. Izvođačice slažu konstrukcije međusobnih odnosa, čime koreografija postaje sve više ograničenom
pravilnostima tih odnosa, sve dok ne stane u smiraju početnog
položaja koji asocira na zborsku liniju. Linija koja simbolizira
unisonost uvježbanih pokreta kao svojevrsni antipod onome
čemu smo svjedočili – otvorenom polju osluškivanja u kojem
je pokret oslobođen od poznatih pravila i obrazaca, što je
tema kojom se Krajač bavi već dulje vrijeme. U Varijacijama o
osjetnom osluškivanjem su se bavile Lana Hosni, Irena Mikec,
Katarina Rilović, Irena Tomašić i Mia Zalukar.
Bruno Isaković još je radikalniji u izloženosti, i izvođača i
gledatelja. U Nečastivima 3 na scenu postavlja jedanaestero
3
Nečastive, koprodukcija Festivala Perforacije, Studija za suvremeni ples i Zagrebačkog kazališta mladih. Premijera: 26. lipnja
2015. u Zagrebačkom kazalištu mladih. Autor koncepta i koreograf:
Bruno Isaković. Umjetnički savjetnik: Zvonimir Dobrović. Dramaturška potpora: Mila Pavićević. Oblikovanje svjetla: Aleksandar
Čavlek. Izvode: Branko Banković, Dina Ekštajn, Ana Mrak, Ana
Vnučec, Bosiljka Vujović-Mažuran, Željko Drmić, Kaia Gilje, Hanna
Hellström, Lana Hosni, Ilija Surla, Mia Zalukar.
198 _ Kretanja 23 | 24
nagih izvođača, tik pred publiku. Usporava pokret do krajnosti, do mikrokretanja kakvo je moguće uočiti samo na goloj
površini kože koja bilježi svaku fazu udaha i izdaha, gotovo
svaku napetost i otpuštanje mišića. Izvođači su u atipičnu
grču koji je upravljan disanjem. Pomaci su minimalni, čime
je pozornost izvođača maksimalizirana. Svaki je pokret dramatičan. Svjetlo je bijelo, iako se njegovo oblikovanje mijenja s vremenom, kao jedini scenski element koji manipulira
situacijom, mijenjajući obrise tijela. Tišina dodatno pojačava
intenzitet pozornosti, a sve što čujemo zvuk je disanja izvođača, i zvukovi iz publike.
U Nečastivima prolazimo intimniji proces u odnosu izvođača i publike. Takva situacija izlaže i osjećaj nelagode kao
socijalno naučena obrasca. Kao gledatelji ne samo da i sami
osvještavamo vlastito disanje nego osvještavamo i nelagodu
kao empatični odgovor na taj krhki položaj izloženosti izvođača pred nama kao promatračima. Kako vrijeme odmiče,
tako se psihološka napetost otpušta, da bi se na kraju otpustila i ona tjelesna, kada izvođači počinju normalno disati
i slobodnije se kretati prostorom. Gotovo automatizirano
kulturološko vezivanje golotinje ili uz seksualnost ili uz nelagodu usporavanjem se i produljenjem izvedbenog vremena
te usredotočenošću na svaki i najmanji pomak tijela potpuno
dokida. Riječ je o aseksualnoj, nudističkoj situaciji. No nije
riječ ni o svođenju tijela na puku estetiku.
Jednako kao i u prethodnim inačicama sola i dueta Nečastivih, samo kompleksnije u odnosima unutar grupe, intenzivno disanje i neprirodne kontrakcije tijela izlažu na površini
tijela njegove unutarnje, oku ne potpuno vidljive pokrete.
Grupa izvođača i grupa gledatelja postaju jednim organizmom koji je ušao u isti tempo otkucaja srca i disanja. Koža
kao opna, kao barijera sve manje predstavlja razotkrivanje,
a sve više granicu kroz koju ne možemo prijeći.
Movements 23 | 24 _ 199
razgovor: Lana Hosni
razgovor: Lana Hosni < Varijacije o osjetnom, Foto: Damir Žižić >
JELENA MIHELČIĆ
Dopustiti si
PROMATRANJE
Razgovor s
Lanom Hosni
L
ana Hosni rođena je 1989. godine. Školovala se u Školi
suvremenog plesa Ane Maletić u Zagrebu te na Salzburškoj eksperimentalnoj plesnoj akademiji (SEAD),
na kojoj je stekla i certifikat iz metodike te diplomirala 2013.
godine. Kao izvođačica dosad je surađivala s Irmom Omerzo,
Marjanom Krajač, Brunom Isakovićem, Willijem Dornerom
i drugima, dok je kao predavačica radila na SEAD-u te na
ekstreninzima, edukativnom programu Ekscene.
¬ Dobar baletni plesač treba svladati zahtjevnu tehniku i
zatim je učiniti svojom, unijeti osobnost u svaku ulogu tako
da izvrsno ovladavanje tehnikom postane samo alatom. Što
za tebe znači biti dobar plesač suvremenog plesa?
Za plesača suvremenog plesa upravo je izbor tehnike, iz
niza postojećih, određena karakteristika osobnosti. Meni je
zanimljiv upravo izbor pristupa tijelu i tehnici te vidjeti što je
plesač s tim napravio, kamo je to sve dalje odveo. Zanimljivo mi je promatrati osobni proces koji se događa u plesača.
Generalno smatram vrijednim dobro povezano tijelo, svijest
na što više razina, uzemljenost, interesira me vidjeti logiku
pokreta, specifičnost i individualnost svačije prisutnosti...
¬
Nije li suvremeni plesač ujedno i koautor svakog djela?
Projekti na kojima sam radila uglavnom su kretali od koreografske propozicije, ali na tome što plesač izloži dalje se
gradi, da bi se u jednom trenutku utjecaji koreografa i plesača
posve izmiješali, a publika na kraju vidi suradnju.
¬ Školovala si se na SEAD-u, u Salzburgu, gdje i mnogi
hrvatski plesači posljednjih petnaestak godina. Što su najveće dobrobiti školovanja na takvoj instituciji?
Raznolikost. Na SEAD-u mnogo toga ovisi o generaciji
koja te dopadne jer se profesori stalno izmjenjuju, gotovo
svaki mjesec. Manji ih se broj vraća, ali uglavnom se izmjenjuju ljudi s raznih strana, od vrsnih pedagoga do aktivnih
izvođača na sceni. Da nabrojim samo neke: Libby Farr, Martin Kilvády, Matej Kejžar, Milan Kozánek, Zuna Kozánková,
Keren Levi, Zsuzsa Rózsavölgy, Todd Williams, Jozef Fruček,
Linda Kapetanea, Eulàlia Ayguadé Farro... Tako s vremenom
naučiš prepoznati što od svakoga možeš primiti. Preuzmeš
stvari koje smatraš zanimljivima i važnima za dalji razvoj, ali
jednako tako dobiješ jasniji uvid u ono što ti nije primarni
interes, imaš prilike iskusiti sve i time razviti određeno razu-
Movements 23 | 24 _ 201
mijevanje i otvorenost, umjesto osude i automatskog odbacivanja. Također dobiješ priliku učiti od kolega studenata,
imaš uvid u drukčije odnose prema radu i različite stavove,
razmjenu ideja, povezivanje na osobnoj i umjetničkoj razini.
Osim same tjelesne prakse i intenzivna rada na tehnici, imali
smo priliku raditi s koreografima na raznovrsnim projektima te upoznati dosta različite pristupe i načine rada. Nakon
izlaganja različitim informacijama izoštrila se sposobnost
razumijevanja koreografa, što mi se poslije pokazalo veoma
korisnim. Osim rada s profesorima, imali smo izvrsnu priliku
sudjelovati i u koreografijama kolega studenata. Suradnički
smo i zajedno prolazili početničke procese i u ravnopravnoj
poziciji razmjenjivali ideje, pri čemu smo postajali svjesnijima
raspona mogućnosti svakoga unutar njegove uloge. Mislim
da su to bili trenuci u kojima sam mogla prepoznati širinu
prostora koji mi je na raspolaganju kao izvođačici.
¬ Koja su te iskustva najviše oblikovala kao plesačicu,
izuzev školovanja?
Kao što sam rekla, u školi dobiješ informacije s raznih strana i kada vidiš što te zanima, onda preuzmeš odgovornost i
sam se educiraš u tom smjeru. Istraživala sam i još istražujem
razne stvari, no najviše sam se usmjerila na somatske prakse,
poslije i na glas, otkrivanje njegovih potencijala te istraživanje
odnosa glasa i tijela. Osim akademije koja predstavlja proces
poslagivanja stvari u glavi i u tijelu, mislim da je na mene
utjecalo sve ostalo, ne nužno izravno vezano uz ples. Fuzija
sa svakodnevnim životom, uočavanje utjecaja emotivnoga
i psihičkoga na tjelesno, otvaranje prema drugim disciplinama i prepoznavanje mjesta gdje se sve te stvari dodiruju s
tjelesnom praksom.
¬ Pretpostavljam da je najgora stvar koja se može dogoditi plesaču, nakon ozljede, da upadne u sigurne obrasce
kretanja. Kako se ti nosiš s time, kako održavaš vlastitu
izvođačku oštroumnost?
Ozljeda bi, na primjer, bila jedan dobar način promjene
obrasca kretanja (smijeh). Nisu one nužno tako loša stvar i iz
njih se da dosta naučiti. Kao plesač tijekom edukacije često
slušaš kako je potrebno izaći iz zone sigurnosti, što je sve odlično u fazi istraživanja, ali u nekom trenutku to bi se trebalo
nadići. Može biti da te baš zanima jedan obrazac i ustrajanje
na novom i inovativnom ne bi nužno bilo produktivno. Mnogo
toga je već sada tu i oštroumnost je, po meni, to prepoznati. Osobno bih probala razne varijante, na primjer svjesno
ustrajati baš na jednom obrascu, da vidim što je to u njemu
što me opsjeda te hoće li me odvesti negdje drugdje i dalje
razviti ili će se jednostavno istrošiti. Najvažnije je prepoznati
što te hrani i vuče da u to ulažeš energiju i zabaviš se time.
Možda katkad jednostavno nema interesa, meni je bio velik
događaj shvatiti da je i to isto O. K. Generalno, ako postoji
202 _ Kretanja 23 | 24
neki problem, smatram da je već veliki posao samo njegovo
osvještavanje i detektiranje uzoraka sa što manje osuđivanja.
Vidjeti gdje je blokada, otpor, izbjegavanje, malo kopati po
tome i provesti s tim neko vrijeme. Moje iskustvo govori da
se isplati ući upravo u stvari koje su nelagodne i koje plaše, jer
se tek tu nešto otvori, opusti i otpusti, postaje dostupnijim. I
na kraju, meni uvijek pomaže vratiti se na tjelesno, utjeloviti
procese, vraćati se na meso. Dosta je plodno i mjesto u kojem
je tijelo dulje vrijeme u akciji i zagrijano, sve cirkulira, otvorenije je i slobodnije teče. Tako da bi postizanje tog stanja bila
jedna od metoda otvaranja slobodnog tijeka pokreta i ideja.
¬ Čini mi se kako se taj proces zbiva u svakoj tvojoj
izvedbi.
To je neko stvarno mjesto na kojem nemam previše izbora, situacija, kada tjelesno preuzme. Meni su takva mjesta iznimno vrijedna, a nadam se i gledateljima. Sve vještije
prepoznajem što me može zainteresirati u danom trenutku i
znam da dokle god imam interesa za nešto nema opasnosti
od stagnacije. Čini mi se da je dopuštanje da se izrazi to što
se želi izraziti produktivnije od preispitivanja. Prepoznavanje
toga što je već tu i prihvaćanje vrijednosti koje se nalaze tu
nasuprot konstantnoj potrebi za usavršavanjem. Tjelesna
je spremnost temelj; rad na postavu tijela, održavanje tijela
raspoloživim i sa što većim potencijalom.
¬ Kakav način rada, odnosno suradnje s koreografima
preferiraš?
Naučila sam naći vlastiti pristup i interes u različitim
procesima.
¬ Najčešće si dosad surađivala s Marjanom Krajač čiji su
recentniji radovi, rekla bih, izrazito izvođački zahtjevni.
Kakva su tvoja iskustva?
Radovi Marjane Krajač definitivno su dovoljno zahtjevni
da me motiviraju i da nešto u toj suradnji nastavlja vibrirati.
Radeći u njezinim projektima zanimljivo je promatrati odnos
između koreografskog i tjelesnog mišljenja, kako koreografsko
mišljenje utječe na tjelesno i obrnuto. Posebnost vezana za
rad s Marjanom Krajač za mene je pomirba s oblicima koje
sam iz nekog razloga u određenom trenutku zanemarila, čak
izbacila iz vokabulara. Na primjer, baletne forme ili forme iz
starih plesova. Naravno, susretala sam se s njima tijekom
školovanja, ali nikad sama ne bih tako ušla u njih. Zanimljivo
je, kad se malo po tome prokopa, da shvatiš da si s tim oblicima izgradio dosta zanimljiv odnos tijekom edukacije, što
emotivan, što estetski. Definitivno sam mogla opaziti da su
označeni naspram drugih, barem u mojem slučaju. Radeći na
njezinim projektima mogla sam se suočiti s time, vidjeti što
meni te forme znače i ponovno se s njima pomiriti, ponovno
ih prisvojiti u vokabular. Sve se to lijepo nastavlja na ideju
razgovor: Lana Hosni koju me osobno zanima istražiti – da nijedan pokret nije bolji
ili ispravniji od drugoga, dakle povratak gledanju pokreta
čisto prema tjelesnim principima, strukturama u prostoru,
relacijama... Dragocjeno je i što smo kao ista grupa ljudi imali
kontinuitet u radu i time mogućnost dubljeg razumijevanja
odnosa i same materije, sudjelovanja u radu koji se stalno
širi i nadograđuje.
¬ Kako bi opisala plesačke zadatke u predstavi Koreografska fantazija br. 1 i Varijacije o osjetnom i što ti je u njima
bilo najizazovnije?
Rekla bih da smo izgradili svoj specifični jezik, a opet
unutar njega ima prostora za slobodu kretanja, individualan
pristup i autonomiju.
¬ Koreografska fantazija br. 1 ima okvirnu strukturu unutar
koje se pleše vrlo slobodno, a u Varijacijama o osjetnom to
je još više potencirano produljenjem vremena na dva i pol
sata trajanja izvedbe. Na koji su način te dvije predstave za
tebe, izvođački, bile drukčije?
Nastavljaju se jedna na drugu i međusobno komuniciraju.
Čak je iskustvo Varijacija, koje su nastale kasnije, dosta utjecalo na prethodnu Fantaziju, koju i dalje izvodimo, i obrnuto.
Produljeno trajanje Varijacija djelovalo je tako da nam je Fantazija postala užasno kratka (smijeh). Osim samog trajanja,
velik izazov predstavlja i apsolutna izloženost izvođačica u
svakome trenutku, što nas pak suočava s raznim novim izazovima. To na kraju rezultira otvaranjem novih i kreativnih
rješenja i ulaženjem u nova mjesta. Varijacije su pomaknule
dosta granica, što naravno utječe na dalji rad koji neizbježno
prelazi na novu razinu. Intenziviranje trajanja izvedbe, izloženosti, tjelesne i mentalne raspoloživosti, fizičkog kontakta s
drugim tijelima, podjela odgovornosti, koja me primorala na
suočavanje s nekim dotadašnjim dvojbama i osvještavanje
veoma prisutnih a, sada vidim, dosta krucijalnih pitanja na
koja nailazim kao izvođačica. U Fantaziji izazov je unutar
okvirne strukture naći svježinu i slobodu, ne prikovati se uz
te strukture, što bi možda bila jedna od tendencija. U Varijacijama smo radili više u odnosu na trenutak, dopuštanju
stvarima da se dogode iz njega.
¬ Je li potrebno neko posebno stanje s kojim se kao izvođačica moraš saživjeti za takve izvedbe i koliko je i kakve
vježbe, odnosno radnih procesa za to potrebno?
Za mene je najplodnije stanje u kojem svjesno dajem impuls tijelu za inicijaciju pokreta, ali u isto vrijeme promatram
kako se to dalje odvija preda mnom. Istodobno sam i izvođačica i promatračica. Bez osuđivanja što će proizaći iz toga, već
prihvaćanje, protočnost. Važno je održavati stalnu tjelesnu i
mentalnu raspoloživost. Dosta je toga u dopuštanju stvarima
da se odviju u svojem punom intenzitetu, dopustiti im njihovo
puno trajanje. Pustiti tijelo da samo razriješi situacije, to je
nešto čemu se uvijek vraćamo. Otvorenost prema ostalim
tijelima u prostoru, uključujući tijela gledatelja. Važno mi je,
pored procesa na kojem radimo, biti svjesnom svoga vlastita
procesa koji se usporedno događa te ulagati u njega. Što se
tiče samog izazova trajanja, volim misliti kako izvedba može
početi i završiti u bilo kojem trenutku. U tom slučaju moje
tijelo postaje medijatorom; ako uspijem doći do tog stanja,
izvedba može trajati i deset sati. Zanimljivo je promatrati kako
tijekom vremena polako otpada sve suvišno i nepotrebno.
Često mi se događalo nakon nekih prijašnjih izvedaba da
bih tek nakon što je izvedba bila završila osjećala da počinje
prava stvar. Tako da su Varijacije lijepa prilika vidjeti što bi ta
prava stvar bila. Meni se čini da se tijelo i prisutnost postupno
opuštaju, stvari postaju sve iskrenijima i čišćima, izravnijima.
¬
Kakav je pritom odnos s publikom?
Činjenica je da mi provodimo neko dulje vrijeme zajedno
u istom prostoru, dok se vani odvija svakodnevni život. Samim time što je netko svjesno došao na izvedbu od dva i pol
sata osjeti se posebna vrsta koncentracije i usredotočenosti,
što je meni kao izvođačici jako dragocjeno. Postoji velik ulog
s obiju strana i time se stvara određena intima. Događa se
i svojevrsna pomirba s publikom i s time da je u redu kako
god se gledatelj osjeća u odnosu na to što se događa. Jednostavno, puštanje gledatelju da gleda i dopuštanje sebi da
kao izvođačica budeš promatrana.
¬ U predstavi Nečastive Brune Isakovića i Studija za suvremeni ples također je na neki način posrijedi drastično
usporavanje i usredotočivanje na promjene u tijelu, ali je
još uveden element nagosti. Kako ta činjenica za tebe mijenja stvari?
Prije svega svaki odjevni predmet ima svoj vlastiti pokret kao posljedicu pokreta tijela i naravno da svaka drukčija
tekstura na tijelu, sve što je nadodano, utječe na poseban
način. U Nečastivima nema tkanine, nema trenja tekstila s
kožom, koža je u dodiru sa zrakom što nosi druge senzacije,
znoj pada, a ne upija se. Opažam da to čini moje poimanje
pokreta čišćim, preciznijim, detaljnijim. Dok emotivni aspekt
varira od trenutka do trenutka, neiskreno bi bilo reći da ne
osjećam neku fragilnost, ali osjećam i slobodu. Ovisi, naravno,
i o kontekstu. Nečastive su specifične jer smo goli od početka
do kraja. U nekim predstavama koje sam izvodila bili smo goli
samo mjestimično i djelomično, pa su tu radili drugi elementi.
Na primjer, u duetu What Are You Lookin’ At (Što gledaš)
Costasa Kekisa razodijevanje je rezultiralo osjećajem slobode
i bezbrižnosti, poput djece, navodilo je na humor i lakoću.
(Un)dressing Code (Kod /raz/odijevanja), duet koji je nastao
za vrijeme školovanja na akademiji u suradnji s Douglasom
Joungom, bavio se otkrivanjem i pokrivanjem dijelova tijela i
Movements 23 | 24 _ 203
time stvaranjem slika, gotovo kiparskih oblika. Tu je bilo zanimljivo promatrati odnos tijela s tkaninom, raznim teksturama,
materijalima, tijelo u odnosu s površinom poda ili zrakom. Prije
dvije sam godine sudjelovala u projektu Ekscene, Undertone
(Prigušenost) koreografa Sidneyja Leonija. Ima situacija u
izvedbi kad su i gledatelji u polumraku, a između njih prolaze
goli izvođači. Zanimljiv je bio osjećaj tenzije u zraku, gustoća,
fragilnost zbog blizine publike i ideja prisutnosti golih tijela
u prostoru, a bez jasne vizualne informacije, napetost koja
ostaje u međuprostorima. U Nečastivima postaješ svjesnijim detalja tijela, sve je čišće, odjednom i sebe vidiš jasnije,
svjestan si da su tu meso, kosti, rebra i dah te koliko u dahu
zapravo ima mnogo pokreta. Izloženi smo publici, ali i samima
sebi kao izvođači. Radi se o drugoj vrsti izloženosti u kojoj se
svaka pogreška na neki način vidi. Zbog usporena principa
kretanja, čistoće i preciznosti u fokusiranju na detalje svaki
je odmak od pravila kretanja iznimno vidljiv. To je za mene
bila još veća izloženost od činjenice da sam gola. Odjednom
svako treptanje ili gutanje postaje velikim događajem, događa
se usredotočenje na svaki i najmanji detalj.
¬ Izvodite u tišini, odnosno bez glazbe ili zvučne kulise.
Kako se snalazite u vremenu, na što se oslanjate?
Jedni na druge. Mnogo smo radili na grupnom usklađivanju vremena i dogovorili neke interne znakove. Ne ulazeći
u autorsku odluku da se ne upotrebljava glazba, izvođački
nama zapravo ta tišina omogućava da bolje čujemo vlastito
disanje koje daje neki svoj ritam.
¬
Imaš li koreografskih afiniteta?
Za sada me dovoljno ispunjava biti koautoricom i izvođačicom, o kojoj govorimo na početku.
Jelena Mihelčić plesna je publicistkinja i savjetnica za odnose s javnošću. Petnaest godina objavljuje tekstove o plesu u
dvotjedniku za kulturu i umjetnost Vijenac, časopisu za plesnu
umjetnost Kretanja te internetskom portalu plesnascena.hr,
čija je stalna suradnica. Zajedno s videoumjetnicom Nives
Sertić koautorica je internetskih plesnih videodokumentaraca eks10. S Ivom Nerinom Sibila i Ivanom Slunjski uredila
je monografiju Modeli zajedništva, strategije vidljivosti. 15
godina Platforme o plesnom festivalu Platforma HR. Bila je
članicom žirija za suvremeni ples Nagrade hrvatskoga glumišta 2012. i Plesne mreže Hrvatske za 2015. godinu. Od 2008.
zaposlena je kao voditeljica odnosa s javnošću u reklamnoj
agenciji Bruketa & Žinić OM, koju je američki časopis Advertising Age 2013. proglasio najboljom malom međunarodnom
agencijom. Diplomirala je novinarstvo na Hrvatskim studijima
Sveučilišta u Zagrebu, specijalizirala se za odnose s javnošću
na London School of Public Relations. Plesnu edukaciju stječe izvaninstitucionalno tijekom dvanaest godina polaženja
satova i radionica klasičnog baleta i suvremenog plesa te je
dobitnica stipendije danceWEB (bečki ImPulsTanz). Sudjelovala je u europskom projektu Communicating Dance čiji je
partner Hrvatski institut za pokret i ples.
204 _ Kretanja 23 | 24
Movements 23 | 24 _ 205
performances: Variations on
Sensitive and Denuded
performances: Variations on Sensitive and Denuded < Denuded, Photo: Imre Kővágó Nagy >
JELENA MIHELČIĆ
On Exposure
and Duration
On performances Variations on Sensitive by Marjana Krajač,
and Denuded by Bruno Isaković
T
he spectators attending recent durational performances by Marjana Krajač and Bruno Isaković are not only
present; they are actually made part of the performance participating in a way that is not of a usual interactive
nature. Although this is a case of a traditionally established
relationship between performers and spectators, with the
latter sitting and watching and the performers being on
the move, or engaged in some sort of action while being
watched. Both authors demonstrate an interesting shift of
focus between the observer and the observed: the focus
becomes hazy, but it never fades away; in fact we become
more aware of it. Although it is not their primary intention,
both authors manage to make the spectators literally feel
their own bodies in relation to the bodies of the performers,
to observe the space and time factors, as well as the motion
and duration thereof. Both authors include the spectators
and their exposure. Although the same thing happens on
an unconscious level during any dance performance, here
it is brought to our awareness more powerfully.
Already in her Choreographic Fantasy No. 11 , and
particularly in Variations on Sensitive2 , Marjana Krajač
1
Choreographic Fantasy No. 1 created with the support of the Art
Pavilion in Zagreb, Croatian Institute for Movement and Dance, Zagreb
Dance Centre and Tanzfabrik/Uferstudios Berlin. Premiere: November 21,
2013 at the Art Pavilion in Zagreb. Author of the concept and choreographer: Marjana Krajač. Dancers: Lana Hosni, Irena Mikec, Katarina Rilović,
Irena Tomašić, Mia Zalukar. Collaborator on the project: Hrvoje Hiršl;
costume design: Link / Ogi Antunac and Zoran Mrvoš; design of graphic
materials: Valentina Toth; sound technician: Miroslav Piškulić; technical
director: Duško Richtermoc; technical assistance: Leonardo Krakić; communications: Anita Klapan. Production: Sodaberg koreografski laboratorij.
2
Premiere: October 18, 2014 at the Home of the HDLU (Croatian
Association of Visual Artists), Barrel Gallery. Author of the concept
emphasises the exposure as idea. The exposure of performers in daylight of the Bačva (Barrel) Gallery during
a two and a half hour long meditation on movement and
bringing to awareness the relation of bodies in space, the
relation of the performers with their own selves, with
the audience, and vice versa. Observing the performers’
gradual immersion into the process of sensing their own
bodies – from the most minute movements of joints,
to simple motions of particular body parts as if though
exploring their own potentials; through increasingly
intensive penetration into space and into their mutual
contact and so on, until reaching the state of stillness
again – we the spectators become more open to sensitive
as well. Prolonging of the performance duration and the
time of observing bodies in motion inevitably drives us
to observing various details of the event. We also start to
observe ourselves: the way we engage and disengage into
the event, into our own body and into our own thoughts
that waver and then focus on the happenings on the stage
again, and on so on – they fluctuate. We, the spectators
take part in the performance by going through a process
similar to the one that the performers are experiencing.
The exposure can here be also viewed as the lack of
theatricality and stage in the traditional sense. Performers
move in daylight, in variations on the theme of everyday
clothes – white shirt and blue shorts – while the audience
and choreographer: Marjana Krajač. Dancers: Lana Hosni, Irena Mikec,
Katarina Rilović, Irena Tomašić, Mia Zalukar. Graphic design: Valentina
Toth; publication editor: Igor Marković; photographer: Damir Žižić;
technical director: Duško Richtermoc; sound technician: Miroslav
Piškulić; assistance: Leonardo Krakić; communications: Anita Klapan.
Production: Sodaberg koreografski laboratorij.
Movements 23 | 24 _ 207
performances: Variations on Sensitive and Denuded
is invited to take part in their transformation. No one
enters or exits the stage area, everything is visible. The
white square dance floor inside the circular gallery space
is wide open, concealing nothing. This is a sort of controlled improvisation in front of the audience or, rather,
an introduction into the process of work on one’s own
body. When the performers get tired, they sit, lie down
or leave the square area to lean on the gallery wall. We
are observing a live texture, interweaving of various levels
of sensitivity to dance. The spectators perhaps might leave
at any moment, but the intention of the performance is
to maintain their prolonged presence and witnessing the
exposure of the dancers.
The performers soon extend their own sensitivity
onto the space around themselves, mirroring it through
their bodies. On closer observation, after some time one
can discern similar movements or principles that the performers take on from each other. This is not the process
of copying, but rather of the inevitable openness towards
influencing one another. After some time physical contact
occurs varying from touching each other’s skin or hair,
through pinching or slapping, to more intensive contacts,
like rolling over each other, pushing, leaning, pulling,
and experiencing various body weights. After being concentrated on them, through spreading to other persons
in the space, their impact and physical approaching, in
the last third of the performance the focus relocates to
the sense of space and to geometry. The performers compose constructions of their interrelations, making the
choreography increasingly limited by the regularities of
these relations, until it comes to a standstill of the initial
position, resembling a sort of chorus line. This line that
symbolizes the unison of trained movements as a kind
of an antipode to what we have witnessed – that open
realm of attentive listening, in which the movement is
free of the well known rules and patterns is the theme
that Krajač has been occupied with for quite some time.
In Variations on Sensitive Lana Hosni, Irena Mikec, Katarina Rilović, Irena Tomašić i Mia Zalukar were engaged
in attentive listening.
Bruno Isaković applies the concept of exposure of
performers and spectators in a more radical manner.
In Denuded3 he places eleven naked performers on the
3
Denuded (Nečastive) is a production of the Perforations Festival
and Studio – Contemporary Dance Company. Project partner: Zagreb
Youth Theatre. Premiere: June 26, 2015 at the Zagreb Youth Theatre.
Author of the concept and choreographer: Bruno Isaković. Performers: Branko Banković, Željko Drmić, Dina Ekštajn, Lana Hosni, Bosiljka
Vujović-Mažuran, Ana Mrak, Ana Vnučec, Kaia Gilje, Hanna Hellström,
Ilija Surla, Mia Zalukar. Artistic advisor: Zvonimir Dobrović. Dramaturgical support: Mila Pavićević. Lighting design: Aleksandar Čavlek.
208 _ Kretanja 23 | 24
stage, right in front of the audience. Movements are
extremely slowed down, to the point of micro-motions
that can be discerned only on the dancers’ bare skin
surface which registers every phase of each inhalation
and exhalation, nearly every muscle tension and release.
Performers are in the state of an atypical spasm that
is regulated by breathing. Shifts are minimal, which
brings about maximal attention of the performers. Each
movement is dramatic. The light is white, although
with time it takes on different shapes, being the only
stage element that manipulates the situation by changing the contours of the bodies. Silence additionally
increases the intensity of attention; all that we hear
are the sounds of performers’ breathing and noises
from the audience.
In Denuded we experience an even more intimate
process in the relationship of performers and audience. This situation also exposes the feeling of unease
as a socially learned pattern. As spectators, we not
only become aware of our own breathing, but also of
discomfort as an empathic reaction to such a delicate
position of exposure of performers in front of us. With
time, the psychological tension is being released, until
finally physical tension, too is relieved, when the performers start breathing normally and move through
space more freely. The slowing down and prolonging
the performance time, with focus on every, even the
smallest bodily movement, almost entirely nullifies that
almost automatic cultural identification of nudity with
sexuality or uneasiness. This is a sexless, nudist situation.
However, this is not the case of reducing the body to
mere aesthetics.
Similarly to the previous versions of solo and duet of
Denuded, only in a more complex manner regarding the
relationships within the group, the intensive breathing
and unnatural contractions of the body expose on its
surface those inner movements which are not entirely
visible to the eye. The group of performers and the group
of spectators become one organism that has taken on the
very same rhythm of heart beating and breathing. The
skin as a membrane, as a barrier represents not so much
a disclosure, but a borderline that we cannot cross.
Movements 23 | 24 _ 209
interview: Lana Hosni
interview: Lana Hosni < Variations on Sensitive, Photo: Damir Žižić >
JELENA MIHELČIĆ
Allow
Yourself
to Watch
An interview with
Lana Hosni
L
ana Hosni was born in 1989. She was educated
at Ana Maletić School of Contemporary Dance in
Zagreb and at the Salzburg Experimental Academy
of Dance (SEAD), where she acquired a Teaching Certificate and graduated in 2013. As a performer, so far she has
collaborated with Irma Omerzo, Marjana Krajač, Bruno
Isaković, Willi Dorner and others. She has been teaching
at SEAD and ekstrainings, the educational program of
Ekscena (Experimental Free Scene).
¬ A good ballet dancer has to master a demanding technique and then make it their own, instilling
their personality into each role, so that the perfect
mastery of the technique becomes merely a tool. In
your opinion, what does it mean to be a good contemporary dancer?
For the contemporary dancer, the mere choice of
a technique from the range of existing ones is a trait
of personality. I find interesting the very choice of the
approach to body and technique; I like to see what the
dancer has done with it, where it takes further. For me
it is interesting to observe the personal process that goes
on in a dancer. Generally, I admire a well connected body,
awareness at as many levels as possible, grounding. I am
interested in making out the logic of the movement, the
peculiarity and individuality of everyone’s presence...
¬ Is not the contemporary dancer also the co-author
of every work?
The projects I have worked on mostly started from
choreographic proposition, but one builds on what the
dancer exposes, so that at one point the influences of the
choreographer and dancer intertwine, and the audience
sees the resulting cooperation.
¬ You were educated at SEAD in Salzburg, like many
Croatian dancers in the last fifteen years or so. What
are the greatest benefits of education at such an
institution?
Diversity. At SEAD a lot depends on your generation,
because teachers are constantly changing, almost every
month. A small number of them returns, but mostly
people from different wakes of life come and go, from
excellent pedagogues to active stage performers. To name
just a few: Libby Farr, Martin Kilvády, Matej Kejžar, Milan
Kozánek, Zuna Kozánková, Keren Levi, Zsuzsa Rózsavölgy,
Todd Williams, Jozef Fruček, Linda Kapetanea, Eulàlia
Ayguadé Farro... With time you recognize what is there
for you to pick up from everyone. You adopt the things
you consider interesting and important for your further
development, but you also get a clearer insight into what is
not your primary interest. You have a chance to experience
everything, and thus develop a kind of understanding and
Movements 23 | 24 _ 211
openness, instead of disapproval and automatic rejection.
You also get the opportunity to learn from fellow students,
you gain insight into diverse approaches to work and different attitudes, and you get to share ideas and connect
on personal and artistic levels. Besides physical practice
and intensive work on technique, we had the opportunity to work with choreographers on various projects and
become familiar with a lot of different approaches and
working methods. Having been exposed to a vast range
of information, I sharpened my ability to understand the
choreographer, which later on proved to be very useful.
In addition to working with the teachers, we also had an
excellent opportunity to participate in fellow students’
choreographies. We cooperated and went through the
beginners’ processes together and exchanged ideas as
equals, all the way becoming increasingly aware of the
range of possibilities everyone has within their role. I think
those were the moments in which I could recognize the
width of the space that I have at disposal as a performer.
¬ What experiences, other than education, shaped
you as a dancer the most?
As I have already said, at school you get information
from different sides, and when you find out what interests you, then you take over responsibility and develop
further in that direction. I have been researching and
exploring a variety of things, but my focus was mostly
directed to somatic practices, later on to the voice too,
to discovering its potential and exploring the relation
between voice and body. In addition to the Academy,
which is basically the process of arranging things in one’s
head and body, I think I was affected by everything
around me, not necessarily directly related to dance.
The fusion with everyday life, observing the impact of
emotional and psychic to the physical, opening up to
other disciplines and recognizing the place where these
things come together with the physical practice.
¬ I guess the worst thing that can happen to a
dancer besides injury is to get into safe patterns of
movement. How do you cope with that, how do you
maintain your own performing acuteness?
An injury would, for instance, be a good opportunity to modify the movement patterns (laughter). They
are not necessarily so bad and you can learn a lot from
them. During education a dancer is often told of the
need to get out of the safety zone, which is great in the
research phase, but at some point it should be overcome.
You could be interested in one particular pattern, and
insisting on new and innovative would not necessarily
be productive. There is a lot in the picture now, and the
212 _ Kretanja 23 | 24
acuteness, in my opinion, is to recognize it. Personally,
I would try different variants, for example consciously
pursue one pattern only, to see what haunts me about it
and whether it will take me someplace else and develop
further, or simply wear out. The most important thing
is to recognize what feeds you, what urges you to invest
your energy into it and get down to it. Maybe sometimes
there is no interest: it felt great when I realized that this
was also O. K. Generally, if there is a problem, I think
becoming aware of it and detecting the patterns with
as little judgment as possible is already a huge part of
the job done. To see where the block, resistance and
avoidance are, dig a little into this and spend some time
with it. My experience shows that it pays off to engage
in the very things that make you feel uncomfortable
and scared, because only in these situations something
opens up, relaxes and releases, becoming more accessible.
Finally, I always find it helpful to return to the physical,
to embody the processes into the body, to get back to the
flesh. The state where the body is in action and heated
up for a longer time is very fruitful too; everything circulates, everything is more open and flows more freely.
So, achieving this state would be one of the methods of
opening the free flow of movement and ideas.
¬ It seems to me that this process is happening in
each of your performances.
It is a sort of real place where I do not have much
choice; the situation in which the physical takes charge.
I find such places extremely valuable, and I hope the
spectators do too. I am becoming more adroit at recognizing what can intrigue me in a given moment, and I
know that there is no danger of stagnation as long as
something interests me. It seems to me that the very
act of allowing the expression of anything that wants to
be expressed is more productive than the reassessment
itself. The recognition of that which is already here and
the acceptance of values being here, as opposed to the
constant need for improvement. Physical preparedness
is the foundation; working on body posture, keeping the
body ready and in as high potential as possible.
¬ What kind of work, that is cooperation with choreographers do you prefer?
I have learned to find my own approach and interest
in diverse processes.
¬ So far you have cooperated most often with Marjana Krajač whose recent works, I would say, are
extremely demanding on the performer. What are
your experiences?
interview: Lana Hosni The works of Marjana Krajač are definitely challenging
enough to motivate me and that something in our cooperation continues vibrating. During work in her projects
I find it interesting to observe the relationship between
the choreographic and physical thinking, the way that
choreographic opinion affects the physical and vice versa.
For me, the work with Marjana Krajač in particular marks
my reconciliation with the forms that I ignored for some
reason at one time, so much that I threw them out of my
vocabulary. These are for instance, ballet forms or the forms
of old dances. Naturally, I came across them during my
education, but I myself would never pursue them in this
way. It is interesting that after some digging into it, you
realize that during your education you have built quite an
interesting relationship with these forms, both emotionally and aesthetically. I could definitely see that they were
branded in contrast to others, at least in my case. While
working on her projects I was able to confront with this,
I could see what these forms meant to me and reconcile
with them again, reintroduce them into my vocabulary. All
of this builds nicely on the idea I am personally keen on
investigating – that no single movement is better or more
correct than another one, namely, the return to observing
the movement solely according to physical principles, structures in space, relations... It is also invaluable that we as
the same group of people had the continuity in the work
and thus the possibility of a deeper understanding of the
relationship and the matter itself, of participating in the
work that is constantly growing and expanding.
¬ How would you describe the dancing tasks in the
performances Choreographic Fantasy No. 1 and Variations on Sensitive, and what did you find the most
challenging in them?
I would say that we have built our specific language,
and yet within it there is room left for freedom of movement, for individual approach and autonomy.
¬ Choreographic Fantasy No. 1 has a framework
structure within which one dances very freely. In
Variations on Sensitive this is emphasized even more
by extending the performance duration to two and a
half hours. In what way were these two performances
different for you from the performer’s point of view?
They continue each other and communicate with each
other. What is more, the experience of Variations, which
came about later on, has had a strong impact on the previous Fantasy, that we still perform, and vice versa. The
prolonged duration of Variations caused Fantasy to seem
so terribly short to us (laughter). Besides duration itself,
a major challenge is the absolute exposure of perform-
ers in every moment, which makes us face a variety of
new challenges. This eventually results in the opening of
new and creative solutions and entering into new places.
Variations have shifted a lot of borders, which of course
affects future work that inevitably moves on to a new
level. Intensification of the duration of the performance,
exposure, physical and mental availability, physical contact
with other bodies, and the division of responsibilities,
which in turn forced me to face some of my previous
doubts and become aware of some very present and, as
I now see, rather crucial questions that I come across as
a performer. In Fantasy the challenge is to find freshness
and freedom within the given framework structure, and
not to be chained to these structures, which could be one
of the tendencies. In Variations we have worked more in
relation to the moment, allowing things to happen from it.
¬ Is it necessary to grow into a particular state as a
performer in that kind of performance? How much
and what kind of exercise or work processes does
that require?
For me, the most fruitful state is the one in which I
consciously send impulses to the body to initiate movement, while observing how it continues to unfold before
me. I am an observer and a performer at the same time.
Without passing judgement concerning the end result,
rather there is acceptance, the free flow. The important
thing is to maintain constant physical and mental availability. A lot relies on allowing things to unfold in their
full intensity, allow them their full duration. Letting
the body solve the situations by itself is something that
we always come back to. There is also the openness to
other bodies in space, including the bodies of the spectators. In addition to the process we are working on, it
is important to me to be aware of, and invest in my own
personal process that is going on simultaneously. As for
the challenge of duration itself, I like to think that the
performance can begin and end at any moment. In that
case, my body becomes the mediator; if I manage to get
into that state, the performance can last ten hours even.
It is interesting to observe how all that is superfluous
and needless slowly falls away with the passing of time. I
often realized after some previous performances that only
after the performance had ended, I felt that the real thing
was yet to begin. So the Variations are a nice opportunity
to see what that real thing would be. It seems to me that
the body and the presence are gradually relaxing; things
are becoming more honest and pure, more direct.
¬ What is the relationship with the audience during
this process?
Movements 23 | 24 _ 213
The fact is that we spend a long time together in the
same space, while outside the everyday life goes on. The
mere fact that someone should deliberately choose to attend
a performance that lasts for two and a half hours creates a
feeling of a special kind of concentration and focus, which
to me as a performer is invaluable. There is much at stake
on both sides and that creates a certain intimacy. A kind of
reconciliation occurs with the audience that it is all right for
the spectators to feel whatever they feel in relation to what is
happening. In a word, it is an act of allowing the spectator to
watch, and allowing yourself as a performer to be watched.
¬ In the performance Denuded by Bruno Isaković
and Studio – Contemporary Dance Company there is
also a sort of drastic slowing down and focusing on
the changes in the body, with the additional element
of nudity. How does this fact change things for you?
First of all, each garment has its own movement as a
consequence of the body movement and naturally, every
different texture on the body, everything that is added,
affects it in a special way. In Denuded there are no fabrics,
there is no friction of textile and the skin, the skin is in
contact with the air, which brings about other sensations;
sweat is dropping, rather than being absorbed. I noticed
that this makes my perception of movement cleaner, more
precise and detailed. While the emotional aspect varies
from moment to moment, it would be insincere to say that
I do not feel some fragility, but also some kind of freedom.
It all depends, of course, on the context, too. Denuded is
specific because we are naked from the beginning to the
end. In some performances that I did we were naked only
partially and sporadically, so there were other elements at
work, too. For instance, in the duet What Are You Lookin’
At by Costas Kekis the undressing resulted in a feeling of
freedom and carelessness, childlike; it led to humour and
lightheartedness. (Un)dressing Code, the duet that came
about during my studies at the Academy in collaboration
with Douglas Joung, dealt with uncovering and covering
parts of the body, thereby creating images, almost sculptural forms. Here it was interesting to examine the relationship
of the body to fabric, a variety of textures, materials, and
the body in relation to the surface of the floor or air. Two
years ago I participated in the Ekscena’s project Undertone,
choreographed by Sidney Leoni. There are situations in
this performance when the spectators are in semi-darkness, with nude performers passing between them. That
feeling of the tension in the air, density, fragility due to
the nearness of the audience and the idea of the presence
of naked bodies in the space, but without a clear visual
information, that tension which remains in the interstices,
that was interesting. In Denuded you become more aware
of the details of the body, everything is purer, and all of
214 _ Kretanja 23 | 24
a sudden you see yourself more clearly, you are aware
that the flesh, bones, ribs and breath are there, and what
multitude of movements there is in the breath actually.
We are exposed to the audience, but also to ourselves as
performers. It is another type of exposure, where every
mistake is in some way visible. Because of the slowed down
principle of movement, purity and precision in focusing
on the details, each departure from the rules of movement
is extremely noticeable. For me this presented an even
greater exposure than the fact that I was naked. Suddenly
every blink or swallowing becomes an important event;
one is focused on every single, even the tiniest of details.
¬ You perform in silence, without music or sound.
How do you navigate in time, what do you rely on?
We rely on each other. We have worked a lot on time
harmonization and we devised some internal signs. Without going into the author’s decision not to use music,
performing in silence actually enables us to better hear
our own breathing, which gives its own rhythm.
¬ Do you have choreographic affinities?
For the time being I find the role of the co-author and performer, that we have talked about at the beginning, fulfilling.
English translation: Jasenka Zajec
Jelena Mihelčić is a dance journalist and a public relations consultant. For the last 15 years she has been publishing
articles on dance in Vijenac, biweekly for culture and art and
in the journal of dance art Kretanja. As a permanent contributor she also writes for the web portal plesnascena.hr. She
is the co-author of online dance video documentaries eks10
with video artist Nives Sertić. Together with Iva Nerina Sibila
and Ivana Slunjski she edited the monograph Models of Communality, Strategies of Visibility: 15 years of the Platform
about the dance festival Platforma HR. She was a member
of the jury for contemporary dance of the Croatian theatre
award in 2012 and Croatian Dance Network in 2015. Since
2008 she has been the head of public relations at the advertising agency Bruketa & Žinić OM, the best small international
agency according to the US journal Advertising Age in 2013.
She graduated in journalism from the Croatian Studies of
the University of Zagreb, and specialized in public relations
at the London School of Public Relations. She acquired her
dance education outside institutions, attending classes and
workshops of classical ballet and contemporary dance during
twelve years. She was the recipient of the danceWEB scholarship (Vienna ImPulsTanz). She participated in the European
project Communicating Dance whose partner is the Croatian
Institute for Movement and Dance.
Movements 23 | 24 _ 215
predstava: Ana Karenjina
predstava: Ana Karenjina < Ana Karenjina, Foto: Ines i Saša Novković >
KATJA ŠIMUNIĆ
Blistavo
samorazaranje
Ane Arkadjevne
Karenjine
O baletu Ana Karenjina u koreografiji Lea Mujića
„A svijeća pri kojoj je ona čitala knjigu prepunu nemira,
obmana, nevolja i zla, planu svjetlošću življom no ikad, osvijetli
joj sve ono što joj je prije bilo u mraku, zapucketala je, stala
blijedjeti te se zauvijek ugasla.”1
Ulazak
K
roz jedna od bijelo lakiranih vrata zagrebačkoga neobaroknog kazališta, kroz koja je maloprije ušla i bučna
i raspoložena premijerna publika ne bi li pronašla svoje
mjesto u parteru, ulazi uspravna, vitka, plavokosa, nasmiješena grofica Ana Arkadjevna Karenjina utjelovljena u prvakinji2
zagrebačkoga baleta – Edini Pličanić. Uz redove gledatelja
1
Lav Nikolajevič Tolstoj, Ana Karenjina, knjiga druga, preveo
Krunoslav Pranjić, Zagreb, NZMH, 1976, str. 360.
2
U doba premijere Ane Karenjine Edina Pličanić imala je status
prvakinje baleta Hrvatskoga narodnog kazališta da bi nekoliko mjeseci poslije dobila status nacionalne prvakinje, što je u hijerarhiji
ovoga kazališta najviši stupanj usporediv, primjerice, s naslovom
danseuse étoile u Pariškoj operi.
koji u kazalištu pozlaćenih štukatura i stolaca presvučenih
crvenim samtom očekuju početak cjelovečernjega baleta 3
3
Tekst se odnosi na praizvedbu baleta Ana Karenjina 4. travnja
2014. u HNK-u u Zagrebu. Koreograf: Leo Mujić; scenska adaptacija
romana i dramaturgija: Valentina Turcu; scenograf: Ivan Kirinčić; kostimograf: Alan Hranitelj; oblikovatelj svjetla: Aleksandar
Čavlek; suradnica koreografa: Ilja Louwen; baletni majstori: Suzana
Bačić, Andrej Barbanov. Grofica Ana Arkadjevna Karenjina: Edina
Pličanić; Grof Aleksej Kirilovič Vronski: Tamás Darai; Grof Aleksej
Aleksandrovič Karenjin: Guilherme Gameiro Alves; Kneginja Katerina Aleksandrovna Ščerbacka: Iva Vitić Gameiro; Grof Konstantin
Dmitrič Levin: Kornel Palinko; Grof Stjepan Arkadjič Oblonski: Robert Bruist; Grofica Darja Aleksandrovna Oblonska: Petra Vargović
Stanciu; Grofica Lidija Ivanovna: Mirna Sporiš; Kneginja Elizabeta
Fjodorovna Tverska: Pavla Pećušak; Grofica Vronska: Mihaela De-
Movements 23 | 24 _ 217
o Tolstojevoj „paklenoj i bajnoj” junakinji, ona hoda polako
prema prosceniju prekrivenu snijegom osvijetljenim jarkim
trakom svjetla. U crnome ogrtaču, s pismom u ruci penje
se na prednji dio pozornice, dok je scena iza nje zakrivena
grimiznim kazališnim zastorom. U tišini disanja publike nekoliko trenutaka čita pismo i onda se iza nje naglo a sinkrono s
glazbom Petra Iljiča Čajkovskoga hitrim podizanjem zastora
otkriva virtuozno mahnit prizor moskovskog društvenog života na klizalištu. Kroz proplamsaje brzih podrški, istrčanih
isklizavanja i opasnih mimoilaženja plesnih parova na baletnome podu, preko kojega smjelo jure kao po ledu, prepoznajemo i intimnu dramu prevarene supruge, ali i jednostavne,
trezvene i praktične žene koja želi spasiti brak, grofice Darje
Aleksandrovne Oblonske – Doli, u sigurnoj i toploj izvedbi
Petre Vargović Stanciu. Krivac u preljubu brat je Ane Karenjine, grof Stjepan Arkadjič Oblonski, puteni uživatelj života,
u duhovitoj izvedbi Roberta Bruista. On je i pošiljatelj pisma
s početka predstave u kojemu moli sestru Anu da dođe iz
Petrograda u Moskvu i pokuša ublažiti neugodnu situaciju
izazvanu njegovom nevjerom.
Narativnost con brio
trenutku kada sa zasnježena petrogradskog proscenija Ana Karenjina zakorači na moskovsku scenu,
društvena se plesna vreva na klizalištu strelovito pretapa u scenu željezničkoga kolodvora, u njezin susret s bratom
i upoznavanje s grofom Aleksejem Kirilovičem Vronskim, s
čijom je majkom dugo putovala i dugo razgovarala u istome
putničkom vagonu od Petrograda do Moskve. Tako furiozna
dramaturška introdukcija odmah izlaže naslovnu junakinju
i budućeg njezina ljubavnika Vronskoga, ali i likove koji će
tkati vrtložnu pozadinu na kojoj će se odigravati ljubavna
autodestrukcija Ane Arkadjevne Karenjine.
Majku Vronskoga pleše Mihaela Devald, smjelo prenaglašenom mimikom, iznimno dojmljive, groteskno aristokratske
geste, neprekidno nešto bezglasno ali napadno pričajući i
ne shvaćajući da ju sin Aleksej uopće ne sluša, da su sva
njegova osjetila već posve osvojena pojavnošću Karenjine.
Kada ubrzo pozadinsko svjetlo jarko osvijetli mjesto nesreće
pružnoga radnika, za čiju tragediju kao da nitko nema vre-
U
vald; General Serpuhovski: Valentin Stoica; Kneginja Sorokina: Jelena Lečić; Marja Jefimovna, dadilja: Valentina Štrok; Serjoža, Anin
sin: Bartol Schönberger (učenik Škole za klasični balet u Zagrebu);
Doktor: Andrej Barbanov. Ljubavnici: Dan Rus, Ovidiu Muscalu,
Daniil Yastrebov, Eugen Dobrescu, Adam Harris. Žene: Ivančica
Alajbeg, Marija Breščanović, Sabrina Feichter, Mai Kageyama,
Ksenija Krutova, Mutsumi Matsuhisa, Rieka Suzuki, Atina Tanović,
Simona Unterajter, Dunja Novković. Civili: Dan Rus, Ovidiu Muscalu, Sven Copony. Časnici: Eugen Dobrescu, George Baldovin, Adam
Harris. Guverneri i posluga: Dan Boeru, Alen Gotal, Andrija Palada,
Emilija Sorić, Siniša Bosnar, Domagoj Vrbljanin, Daniil Yastrebov,
Arcadie Belenco, Danijela Batur.
218 _ Kretanja 23 | 24
mena, i kojega nehajno prekorači vehementna, zabave željna kneginja Elizabeta Fjodorovna Tverska – Betsi, u poletnu
samosvjesnu plesu Pavle Pećušak, tada, već hitajući, počinje
bal. Spuštaju se lusteri, vijore haljine i otvara još jedan javni
prostor za pogledima majki, rođakinja i mnogih drugih pratiteljica doličnosti i društvenih pravila ovjerene, bliske dodire
tijela djevojaka i mladića što plešu svoje duete nerijetko kao
izravne ljubavne pregovore.
Baletnu libretizaciju Ane Karenjine, djela Lava Nikolajeviča
Tolstoja koje Orhan Pamuk4 primjerice, a nikako nije u tome
usamljen, označava najvećim djelom svih vremena u romanesknoj umjetnosti, Valentina Turcu uspostavlja s mnogo razuma
i osjećaja, da ostanemo i dalje u literarnim asocijacijama. I
sama najprije izvanredna plesačica, potom profinjena koreografkinja, Valentina Turcu 5 ovdje se iskazuje kao osjetljiva
dramaturginja koja sažimanje majstorskog tisućustraničnog
narativnog predloška ostvaruje prelamanjem kontekstuirajućih
prizora devetnaestostoljetnoga ruskog društvenog života kroz
simultanost scenskih događanja razborito stiješnjenih u kratke
prizore. I stvara podatni raster za plesno razastiranje složenih
emocionalnih odnosa i psiholoških portreta fatalnoga trokuta
Aleksej Aleksandrovič Karenjin – Ana Arkadjevna Karenjina
– Aleksej Kirilovič Vronski. Karnalnu i posesivnu ljubav Ane
Arkadjevne prema Alekseju Vronskome na takvoj dramaturškoj podlozi Leo Mujić 6 rastvara u raskošno rasplesane
4
U eseju „Što to radi naš um kad čitamo roman” iz zbirke
predavanja na sveučilištu Harvard 2009. sabranih u knjizi Naivni i
sentimentalni romanopisac, Zagreb: Vuković & Runjić, 2013.
5
Valentina Turcu rođena je u Zagrebu, a njezini roditelji Maja
Srbljenović i Marin Turcu bili su prvaci baleta zagrebačkog HNK-a. S
devetnaest godina ulazi u L’Ecole – atelier Rudra Béjart u Lausanni,
gdje se tri godine usavršava i ostvaruje niz uloga u baletima Mauricea Béjarta. Velik dio njezine karijere vezan je uz Slovensko narodno gledališče u Mariboru, u kojem pleše višestruko nagrađivane baletne uloge, a kao koreografkinja postavlja balete od kojih se izdvaja
Romeo i Julija Sergeja Prokofjeva (2012). Isto baletno djelo postavlja
u suradnji s Leom Mujićem u Nacionalnom latvijskom baletu u Rigi
(2014) i u kazalištu Opéra-Théâtre de Metz Métropole (2015). U
Baletu Hrvatskoga narodnog kazališta u Splitu je postavila Ravelov
Bolero (2009) i Ščedrinovu Carmen (2011), koju 2014. ponovno
kreira za mariborski Balet. Koreografiju Leave Me na glazbu Georga
Friedricha Händela u sklopu večeri posvećene međunarodnim
zvijezdama baleta postavila je u londonskoj Covent Garden Dance
Company (2012), a za istu skupinu priprema i balet Pierrot Lunaire
na glazbu Arnolda Schönberga. Za balet Ana Karenjina (2014) u
zagrebačkom HNK-u potpisuje adaptaciju i dramaturgiju, a zajedno
s Leom Mujićem i autorski izbor glazbe. Valentina Turcu i Leo Mujić
kao suautori postavljaju balet Opasne veze na Dubrovačkim ljetnim
igrama, u koprodukciji s mariborskim SNG-om i Festivalom Ljubljana (2014).
6
Leo Mujić je nakon završene baletne škole u Beogradu diplomirao na L’Ecole – atelier Rudra Béjart u Lausanni. Plesao je u
koreografijama plesnih umjetnika poput Mauricea Béjarta, Alessija
Silvestrina, Jacopa Godanija, Marguerite Donlon, Jiřija Kyliána,
Williama Forsythea, Matsa Eka, Ohada Naharina, Amande Mueller,
Jeana Christophea Blaviera, Blance Lee, Nacha Duata, Carolyn Carl-
predstava: Ana Karenjina prizore što na trenutke dodiruju suvremenoplesnu oslobođenost tijela. Leo Mujić svoju Anu Karenjinu koreografira kao
odličan poznavatelj akademske baletne tehnike kroz čije su
plesačko tijelo prošle i moderna baletna i suvremena baletna
i postneoklasična baletna gestika umjetnika poput Mauricea
Béjarta, Matsa Eka, Nacha Duata, Jiřija Kyliána, i primus inter
pares kada je u pitanju čitljivost utjecaja na Mujića – Williama Forsythea. Unutar takva eklektična pristupa svako toliko
zabljesnu emocionalni udari plesnoga djelovanja i tjelovanja
koji dramatičnošću boje i osebujnim čine Mujićev izraz.
Zajedničkim autorskim izborom dramaturginje i koreografa ulomaka djela Petra Iljiča Čajkovskoga koja nisu pisana za
balete7 naglašena je osjećajnost, ali i jasnoća plesno-dramason, Philippea Decoufléa i dr. Usporedno s plesnom karijerom gradi
i onu koreografa. Koreografirao je baletne predstave za Berlinski
državni balet, Slovensko narodno gledališče u Ljubljani, Akademiju
za glazbu i ples u Zürichu, solo za Tamása Nagyja u Nizozemskom
nacionalnom baletu u Amsterdamu, solo za Aurélie Dupont u
Pariškoj operi, balet Promijeni me na glazbu Johanna Sebastiana
Bacha za plesni festival Jacob’s Pillow u Massachusettsu, solo za
Davida Hollberga, prvaka njujorškog American Ballet Theatera,
duet za Drew Jacoby i Rubinalda Pronka itd. Gostuje kao pedagog u
mnogim baletnim ansamblima i školama, primjerice u Slovenskom
narodnom gledališču u Ljubljani, Hrvatskome narodnom kazalištu u Zagrebu, Komičnoj operi u Berlinu, Bečkoj narodnoj operi,
Gradskom kazalištu Bolzano, Opernom studiju u Tokiju i Fukuoki
i dr. Kao priznati slobodni umjetnik često nastupa na baletnim
koncertima, primjerice Malakhov & Friends, Stars of the 21st Century
u Torontu, World Stars u Budimpešti, u Australiji (Balet Queensland
u Brisbaneu), međunarodni gala koncert u Taipeiju, godišnji gala
koncert u Dortmundu, gala koncert Zvijezde stuttgartskog Baleta i
mnogi drugi. Za te nastupe koreografije radi sam, a partnerica mu
je najčešće Ilja Louwen, koja mu je česta suradnica kao pomoćnica
koreografa u baletnim predstavama. U Hrvatskoj je Leo Mujić u
riječkom Hrvatskom narodnom kazalištu Ivan pl. Zajc koreografirao predstavu nastalu u suradnji s koreografkinjom Mašom Kolar
Pour homme et femme (2013). U suautorstvu s Valentinom Turcu
2014. na Dubrovačkim ljetnim igrama postavio je balet Opasne veze,
u koprodukciji s mariborskim SNG-om i Festivalom Ljubljana. U
baletu zagrebačkog Hrvatskog narodnog kazališta 2008. postavio
je kraće baletno autorsko djelo Idi vidi, a 2011. cjelovečernji balet
Tišina mog šuma te 2014. cjelovečernji balet Ana Karenjina. U sezoni
2015/2016. Leo Mujić pozvani je gostujući umjetnik u baletu Hrvatskog narodnog kazališta Ivan pl. Zajc u Rijeci.
7
Ruski skladatelj Rodion Ščedrin prvi je posegnuo za Tolstojevim romanom Ana Karenjina kao predloškom za baletnu partituru i
posvetio je svojoj supruzi, primabalerini Maji Pliseckoj, koja je i plesala naslovnu ulogu i koreografirala svjetsku praizvedbu baleta Ana
Karenjina 1972. u Velikom kazalištu u Moskvi. Potkraj iste godine
Dimitrije Parlić postavlja svoju koreografsku inačicu na Ščedrinovu
glazbu s Beogradskim baletom, a Aleksej Ratmanski istu glazbu
pretvara u balet Ana Karenjina 2004. s Danskim kraljevskim baletom u Kopenhagenu. Glazbu pak Petra Iljiča Čajkovskoga za baletno
uprizorenje Tolstojeva romana u različitim autorskim izborima
upotrijebili su André Prokovski za inačicu Ane Karenjine s Australskim baletom u Melbourneu 1979, Boris Eifman za praizvedbu Ane
Karenjine s vlastitom baletnom trupom 2005. u Sankt-Peterburgu.
Valentina Turcu i Leo Mujić biraju također djela Čajkovskoga za balet Ana Karenjina 2014, a u sezoni 2014/2015. koreograf Christian
turške strukture, koja daje istodobno romantično i metrički
strukturirano uporište ovom jednoipolsatnom baletu u dva
dijela, postavljenom na špici. Dosljedno komprimirana burna narativnost jasno izlaže događaje, a rječnik akademskog
baleta u frikciji s postneoklasičnom izglobljenošću naglašava
izravnost i preciznost plesne geste.
Paralelizam Karenjina i Vronskoga
nutar plesnog prosedea zaposjednuta klasikom koja
je izmaknuta iz svoga fundamentalnog središta danas već etabliranom forsytheovskom plesnom subverzijom gravitacijske osi Mujić se suvereno koristi rječnikom usvojenim, brojnim izvedbama u funkciji interpretatora,
plesača, a ne boji se ni dodati tomu suvremenijem plesnom
idiomu onaj starinske provenijencije: mimsku gestu i mimske
prizore. Njih smješta između plesanih dionica, kao svojevrsni
psihološki višak koji stvara napetost u odgodi željno očekivana plesnog nastavka. Primjerice, scena ispijanja čaja toliko
je umjetna u simulaciji prisnosti bračnoga života da ta kratka
pantomimska stilizacija razotkriva svu složenu neskladnost
odnosa i zasićuje prostor žudnjom za pokretom. Koji zamahnita kao, primjerice, kada Karenjin ostane sam u sobi nakon
što je Ana Arkadjevna najprije mislima, a potom i svim svojim
tijelom letjela k ljubavniku.
Leo Mujić i Valentina Turcu inovativno su protumačili i
pokrenuli grofa Alekseja Aleksandroviča Karenjina kao snažna i tjelesno markantna supruga, nimalo dosadna i isključivo
društvenim konvencijama dosljedna muškarca. Njegov je lik
građen na opreci javnoga i osobnoga; u društvenim situacijama povučen je, suzdržan, kontrolira emocije, ali u intimnim
prizorima samoće nahrupljuje sva njegova zatomljena užasna
povrijeđenost i istinska želja da zadrži suprugu, u plesački moćnoj i potresnoj izvedbi baletnoga plesača istančane
osobnosti Guilhermea Gameira Alvesa.
Karenjinu je suprotstavljen Vronski, mladić romantična
ozračja i nježnije tjelesne ekspresije, upravo predestiniran za
rad idealizacije koja djeluje u početku zaljubljenosti. Tako je
krajnje uvjerljiva, iako ne i razumna i razumljiva zanesenost
Ane Karenjine, njezina smetenost na balu, njezino nemoćno
nastojanje da ne traži pogledom Vronskoga, da ga bezuspješno pokuša izbjeći u fatalnome dodiru najavljenom opasno
bliskim zagrljajem u plesu koji je opsjeo balske dvorane sredinom devetnaestoga stoljeća – vrtoglavu valceru.
Utjelovljivanje Karenjina kao poželjna muškarca dodatno
osnažuje tragediju preljubničkog eskapizma Ane Karenjine,
a koreografiranje Vronskoga kao nježno ustrajna ljubavnika, u profinjenoj interpretaciji veoma mlada i vrlo nadarena
U
Spuck postavlja Anu Karenjinu s baletom Operne kuće u Zürichu,
koristeći se uglavnom djelima Sergeja Rahmanjinova i Witolda
Lutosławskoga.
Movements 23 | 24 _ 219
baletnoga plesača Tamása Daraija, dovršava taj tragični pas
de trois.
Suvremeni filozof Slavoj Žižek na predavanju je o svojoj drami o Antigoni 8 govorio da je važno čitati stara djela
unoseći promjenu, ispričati izvornu priču na drukčiji način;
da je jedina prava reakcija „istupiti iz poznate perspektive”.
Postavljanje Karenjina kao privlačna muškarca i postavljanje
plesačkog ekvilibrija između njega i Vronskoga istupanje je
iz poznate perspektive i ono opsesivnost i posesivnost Ane
Karenjine spram ljubavnika, njezinu nepokolebljivu zabludu
čini još strašnijom.
Zasanjanost Kiti Ščerbacke
ontrapunkt očaravajućoj osviještenoj ženskosti Ane
Karenjine posve je mlada i divno naivna kneginja Katerina Aleksandrovna Ščerbacka – Kiti. Nesputana u
svome plesnom pokretu, bezazleno sretna, čedna, neskriveno
zaljubljena u Vronskoga, razoružavajuće iskrena Kiti Ščerbacka
u interpretaciji Ive Vitić Gameiro snažno je uporište predstave.
Dramatično je njezino nastojanje da na balu rukom okrene
glavu Vronskoga prema sebi, dok on gleda Anu Karenjinu,
koja se uzaludno trudi ne izgubiti se u rušilačkoj zaljubljenosti.
Ganutljiva je Kitina bol u razlomljenim linijama ruku i šaka, u
impulsima koji potresaju njezin gibljivi torzo. Iva Vitić Gameiro, koja u svome tijelu amalgamira klasičnobaletnu vještinu
i suvremenoplesne slobode, i poslije će tijekom predstave
modelirati profinjenom plesnom gestom svoje sabiranje iz
očaja povrijeđenosti u, opet iskreno, uranjanje u bezuvjetnu
ljubav grofa Konstantina Dmitriča Levina, u bračni život s
njim. Kornel Palinko nije imao mnogo plesačkog prostora za
usložnjavanje uloge toga vječno sumnjičava giganta dobrote
i misaonog središta romana, ali je uspio svojim minijaturama
donijeti primjereno intelektualna, zanesena Levina.
Treba naglasiti izvrsnost i usredotočenost svakoga pojedinog plesača i plesačice, koji pokreću bilo društvene bilo
psihološke krajolike za tragediju Ane Arkadjevne Karenjine,
uključujući i dječaka Bartola Schönbergera u ulozi njezina
sina Serjože. Izdvojimo i groficu Lidiju Ivanovnu u mračnim
misticizmom prožetoj izvedbi Mirne Sporiš ili gorljivu plesnu
izvedbu balerina poput Sabrine Feichter, Mai Kageyame,
Atine Tanović, Rieke Suzuki ili Ksenije Krutove u prizorima
klizališta, bala, trkališta, kazališta, jer njihova energičnost, eksplozivnost i tehničko-izražajna spremnost grade nužan stvaralački predtekst odnosno pretpokret solističkim kreacijama.
K
8
Slavoj Žižek gostovao je 17. siječnja 2015. u zagrebačkom
Hrvatskom narodnom kazalištu u sklopu programa Filozofskoga
teatra, predstavivši u razgovoru sa Srećkom Horvatom svoju dramsku inačicu, odnosno njih tri, Sofoklove Antigone, čija bi svjetska
praizvedba trebala biti upravo u tome kazalištu .
220 _ Kretanja 23 | 24
Smjela krhkost Ane Arkadjevne Karenjine
alerina per se, Edina Pličanić u svojoj je dvadesetogodišnjoj karijeri otplesala mnoge amblematske uloge
romantičnog, klasičnog, neoklasičnog i modernog
baleta, a za stvaranje plesnoga tijela Ane Karenjine pripada
joj nedvojbeno i odlika kreatorice uloge. Minucioznom tehničkom izrađenošću, bezuvjetnom predanošću i zastupanjem naslovne junakinje, Edina Pličanić utjelovila je otmjenu
i fragilnu, zanesenu i strastvenu Anu Karenjinu, iznalazeći u
svome plesnom imaginariju drhtaje suvremenoplesnih ispada
u trenucima kada tijelo posrne pred navalom osjećaja. Izdvojimo scenu vođenja ljubavi s Karenjinom, njezino mrtvo tijelo
na podu koje idiosinkrastično reagira na pokušaje ljubavnih
dodira, za razliku od putenog dueta s Vronskim i njezina uzdaha užitka na trkalištu, dok se u pozadini projicira Konj u
pokretu Eadwearda Muybridgea, a plesačice i plesači koje smo
dotad vidjeli na klizalištu i balu prate taj trk leđima okrenuti
publici, s navijačkim gestama što prosijavaju u protusvjetlu.
Ili patnja Ane Karenjine za sinom, odlučnost da ga usprkos
muževim zabranama ipak vidi, njezina rastrganost između
obveze prema Karenjinu i ljubavi prema Vronskome, njezina
doslovna razapetost na kraju prvoga dijela predstave na rukama muža i ljubavnika uz zvuke orgulja simfonije Manfred.
Edina Pličanić svaku tu scenu igra s obnovljenom snagom i
novoiznađenim valerima plesne izražajnosti, s nepredvidivim
naletima istodobno krhke plesne geste i smjele virtuoznosti.
Jedan od dominantnih je i prizor bijega ljubavnika u talijansku idilu, u kojoj se ispod naizgled sjajne površine naziru
prijeteće napukline u njihovu odnosu, i tu Ana Karenjina u
plesu Edine Pličanić, udaljeno vremenom ali blisko izborima
po srodnosti, na trenutke u gestici ruku i šaka, u pognutu vratu i drhtavu tijelu, kao da priziva Fokinovu koreografiju Smrti
labuda za Anu Pavlovu, kao da u njezinu plesu zaljubljene
žene potitravaju krila tragične ptice. A na samome početku
toga prizora Vronski je unosi na rukama, umotanu u platno
koje potom zajedno vješaju na zid scene i mi prepoznajemo na
njemu otisnute Adama i Evu izgnane iz Raja. Ana Arkadjevna
oponaša geste Evinih ruku prekriženih preko grudi i još je taj
izgon mogući predmet šala i užitaka preljubničkoga para.
Potkraj prizora Vronski će joj platno ovjesiti oko vrata, a ona
ga skinuti i poput ešarpe tim platnom obgrliti njega. Ljubav
je njihova na određeni način tako prenesena u eskapizam
suvenira iz dućana svjetskih muzeja i galerija, poput posvuda
otisnutih (na bilježnicama, šalicama, majicama, kutijicama,
olovkama…) replika majstorskih umjetničkih djela. Bezuspješan pokušaj da se kopijom djela, kopijom ljubavi, nečim što
samo podsjeća da smo nekada vidjeli ili živjeli original, zadrži
prvotni osjećaj. U trenucima scene talijanske idile oboje su već
negdje drugdje, ona čezne za sinom, on za vojnom karijerom.
Izvjestan je, neodložan, kraj koji svatko od gledatelja
predstave nedvojbeno poznaje ili iz romana ili iz njego-
B
predstava: Ana Karenjina vih nebrojenih ekranizacija – samoubojstvo pod kotačima
vlaka. Ali ne. Kao što Edina Pličanić na početku predstave ulazi kroz gledalište i penje se na pozornicu, tako će
i na samome kraju Leo Mujić i Valentina Turcu još jednom naglasiti kontekst kazališnoga mehanizma. Naime,
u završnome prizoru nema cvilećeg zvuka kotača, oblaka
pare i ubojito snažnih farova vlaka, nema ni aluzije na
scenografiju željezničkoga kolodvora. Tek u pozadini svi
osim Vronskoga, koji je otišao u dubinu mraka postscenija,
poredani jedan do drugoga, likovi iz predstave. Oni sjede
na stolcima i gledaju prema publici, a na sredini prazne
pozornice spušta se dio rasvjetnoga mehanizma – pomični most s nanizanim velikim reflektorima. Jedan od njih
okomito pada izravno na Anu Arkadjevnu Karenjinu i ona
se, kada joj reflektor gotovo dotakne glavu, spušta ispod
njegove zasljepljujuće konstrukcije. I polagano liježe na
pod. Predaje se bespoštednu rasvjetnu tijelu „koje planu
svjetlošću življom no ikad, osvijetli joj sve ono što joj je
prije bilo u mraku” i ostaje ležeći. Izručena nepodnošljivu,
razornu sjaju. A zastor se obrušava s jedne i druge strane
scene i tu je kraj predstave.
Junakinjina smrt visoko je stilizirana, naglašeno teatralizirana, blistavo metaforična. Kao da se pod velikim snopom
svjetla zastrašujuće metalnog, teškog kazališnog reflektora
raspršuje u nepovrat tjelesna sanjarija, kao da lomnom plesnom gestom Edine Pličanić zazvana Ana Pavlova inkorporira
nekog tragičnog, suvremenog umirućeg labuda u zaplesanu
korporealnost Ane Arkadjevne Karenjine.
Movements 23 | 24 _ 221
razgovor: Edina Pličanić
razgovor: Edina Pličanić < Ana Karenjina, Foto: Ines i Saša Novković >
KATJA ŠIMUNIĆ
Poput obične
prolaznice na ulici,
a zapravo Labud
Razgovor s
Edinom Pličanić
E
dina Pličanić rođena je u Zagrebu, gdje je završila gimnaziju i Srednju školu za klasični balet, u klasi Silve Muradori. Od 1994. članica je Baleta Hrvatskog
narodnog kazališta u Zagrebu, prvakinjom kojega postaje
2003, a nacionalnom baletnom prvakinjom 2014. Trostruka
je dobitnica Nagrade Ana Roje – 2001. za uloge u baletima
Labuđe jezero, Coppélia, Tko je ugasio svjetlo, Četiri godišnja doba te za uloge u opernim predstavama Hovanščina i
Aida, 2010. za ulogu Marguerite Gautier u baletu Dama s
kamelijama i 2011. za ulogu Aurore u baletu Trnoružica te
za ukupan umjetnički doseg u Baletu Hrvatskog narodnog
kazališta u Zagrebu; dvostruka je dobitnica Nagrade hrvatskog glumišta za iznimno ostvarenje mladom umjetniku do 28
godina u kategoriji baleta – u kazališnoj sezoni 2002/2003.
za ulogu Julije u baletu Romeo i Julija i u sezoni 2004/2005.
za ulogu Odette/Odilije u baletu Labuđe jezero. Dobitnica
je i Nagrade hrvatskog glumišta za najbolju žensku baletnu
ulogu u sezoni 2006/2007. za Auroru u Trnoružici, Medalje
grada Zagreba za umjetnička dostignuća 2008, Nagrade
publike Teatra.hr za najbolju izvođačicu godine i Nagrade
Tito Strozzi za ulogu Ane Karenjine u istoimenom baletu u
koreografiji Lea Mujića 2014.
¬ S početkom 2016. u vašoj vas matičnoj kući očekuje suradnja s francuskim koreografom Patriceom Bartom koji će
postaviti balet Romeo i Julija na glazbu Sergeja Prokofjeva.
Nije još objavljena podjela, no prisjetimo se da je upravo
Julija bila vaša prva premijerno izvedena solistička uloga,
2002. na Prokofjevljevu glazbenu partituru i u koreografskoj
inačici Dinka Bogdanića1 .
1
Baletni plesač i koreograf, aktualni direktor Baleta Hrvatskog
narodnog kazališta u Splitu, Dinko Bogdanić balet uči kod Sonje
Kastl i Frane Jelinčića. S nepunih osamnaest godina postaje članom
Baleta Hrvatskog narodnog kazališta u Zagrebu, u kojem ubrzo
stječe status prvaka. Od 1971. do 1975. usavršavao se u Baletnom
kazalištu u Pittsburghu, u kojem pleše solističke uloge, a 1978.
odlazi u München, gdje je angažiran kao baletni prvak u Bavarskoj
državnoj operi i baletu. Od 1983. do 1986. pleše u Hamburškom
baletu, također u statusu prvaka, a od 1991. do 1997. angažiran
je kao profesor na Baletnoj akademiji u Münchenu te od 1998. do
2002. kao prvi baletni majstor u Baletu državne opere u Berlinu.
Ravnatelj je zagrebačkog Baleta HNK-a od 2002. do 2005. i postavlja
balete Bajadera na glazbu Ludwiga Minkusa, Romeo i Julija na glazbu Sergeja Prokofjeva, Giselle na glazbu Adolphea Adama, Labuđe
jezero na glazbu Petra Iljiča Čajkovskoga i La Valse i Pavanu za umrlu
infantkinju na glazbu Mauricea Ravela. Također je kreirao autorski
balet Tramvaj zvan čežnja na glazbu Mladena Tarbuka.
Movements 23 | 24 _ 223
Da, bilo je to 2002, sjećam se i datuma, 7. prosinca, predivno vrijeme za mene, ostvarenje snova mlade, mlade balerine
kakva sam tada bila, spremna da poletim u svoju avanturu. Bio
je to moj pravi debi jer sam imala priliku na premijeri plesati
glavnu rolu. Zato smatram Juliju pravim početkom svoje karijere
iako sam u baletu od 1994. i do uloge Julije otplesala sam mnogo drugih uloga. Krenula sam od zadnjeg reda ansambla, od
nekakvih malih solističkih uloga, preko malo većih, onda su se
dogodile i neke velike uloge, ali Julija je bila baš premijerna uloga
i – prelijep san. S Dinkom Bogdanićem bilo je divno surađivati
zato što je prilagođavao koreografiju meni i na neki mi način
dopuštao da samostalno kreiram, što mi je i danas najdraže,
kad se dogodi osobna kreacija, kad te koreograf osluškuje i iz
tebe koreografira. Romea je kao gost igrao predivan, stasit
slovenski plesač Jaš Otrin. Bio je to balet na špici neoklasičnog
izričaja, a korake je Bogdanić prilagodio nama, koreografirao
je ono što je nama najviše odgovaralo. Otrin je bio jako visok
i snažan partner u čijem sam naručju stvarno djelovala krhko i
nevino, i nježno, tako da su ti dueti bili prepuni velikih, lijepih
podrški i baš su bili koreografirani prema nama.
¬ Deset godina nakon toga ponovno plešete Juliju, taj
put u koreografskoj inačici Svebora Sečaka, koji se temom
toga baleta bavio i teorijski u svom diplomskom radu na
Sveučilištu New England u Australiji.
Sečak je balet Romeo i Julija postavio u povodu četrdesete obljetnice Bermudskog građanskog baleta. I on mi je
promišljeno povjerio ulogu Julije, jer je znao da je to moja rola
koja je negdje duboko ostala ležati u meni, i jako me veselilo
poslije deset godina, s odmakom, tumačiti Juliju. I naravno,
bilo je veoma lako iščupati tu nevinu, zaigranu djevojčicu koja
je ostala u meni i koja će vjerojatno cijeli život tu biti. Jer za
mene... događa mi se... dovoljno mi je čuti samo prve taktove
Prokofjevljeve glazbe da se ponovno vrati taj osjećaj. Naglašavam, tu premijeru 2002. smatram nečim najposebnijim što
sam doživjela. Ta glazba i ta priča, dan-danas mislim da je to
jedan od najljepših baleta. Zato me veseli da ćemo ponovno
postavljati Romea i Juliju, da će takav veliki koreograf, kakav
je Patrice Bart, raditi s nama, baletni umjetnik kroz čije su
ruke prošli mnogi izvanredni plesači francuske, njemačke i
talijanske plesne scene, vjerujem da ćemo uz njega moći dobiti
još na baletnoj patini i da ćemo dobiti još neke nove inpute.
¬
Koje je zapravo vaše prvo sjećanje na ples?
Mislim da je to bilo davno, još u vrtiću, kad bismo se
igrale, mi djevojčice imale smo suknjice na sebi i onda se vrtjele ukrug. Sjećam se, govorile smo jedna drugoj: „Hajdemo
se igrati ruža!” A ruža... ruža je bila ples, kad se vrtimo oko
sebe, a te se suknjice napuhnu i podignu i naprave ružu. I
tako smo bile ruže. To je moje prvo sjećanje na ples, ili... ili
možda mamin i tatin novogodišnji ples...
224 _ Kretanja 23 | 24
¬
Kako je došlo do upisa u baletnu školu?
U prvom razredu Osnovne škole Pantovčak jedna od
slobodnih školskih aktivnosti bila je ritmika. Tada je ritmiku
vodila Edita Cebalo i znala je, jer je i sama svojedobno polazila
klasičnu baletnu školu, znala je kakvo tijelo treba za takvu
školu. Ona je uočila moje fizičke predispozicije, da imam tijelo
koje je podatno za balet i savjetovala mojoj majci da pokušam, ako me to bude zanimalo, upisati se u baletnu školu.
Znači, imala sam sreću da me već veoma rano prepoznala
pedagoginja i usmjerila u baletnu školu. A veoma je važno da
vas netko rano prepozna i uputi. Tako da mi je mama rekla:
„Znaš, Edita misli da bi bilo dobro da se upišeš u baletnu
školu, da si talentirana za balet.” A ja sam rekla: „Aha, u
redu.” I to je bilo to, nikad se poslije nisam pokolebala. Znači,
veoma rano mi je netko rekao da bih bila dobra balerina, a
mama me odvela na Labuđe jezero u kojem je tada Bijelog
labuda i Crnog labuda plesala legendarna Vesna Butorac. Ja
sam negdje u mraku gledala i shvatila: aha, to ću ja biti, to
će biti moje zanimanje. I tako je i bilo.
¬ Polazili ste osmogodišnju Školu klasičnoga baleta u
Zagrebu. Koji su pedagozi obilježili vaše školovanje i vaše
plesno usavršavanje nakon završene baletne škole?
Moram reći da je moje školovanje najviše obilježila moja
posljednja profesorica Silva Muradori. Dobila sam ju potkraj
svojega školovanja za pedagoga i ona je udarila završni pečat.
Bila je fantastična pedagoginja, učvrstila me i dala mi završni
poticaj koji ti treba da postaneš snažnijom plesačicom i da
se možeš suočiti s profesionalnim baletnim svijetom. A moj
glavni, moj životni pedagog je Iraida Lukašova, dugogodišnja baletna majstorica u Hrvatskom narodnom kazalištu u
Zagrebu. Ona je baletna umjetnica iz Kijeva koja je prije više
od dvadeset godina došla u naš teatar i veoma me rano prepoznala... Dok sam bila klinka u ansamblu, uvijek me pratila
ispod oka. Katkad bi me zaustavila na hodniku kazališta i pitala što sam po horoskopu, pa bi me pitala što mislim o plesu,
mislim li se ozbiljno baviti plesom, dok me nije jednu večer
pozvala na probu, nakon one koju je vodila primabalerinama
Almiri Osmanović i Ireni Pasarić. Rekla mi je da pričekam da
završe probu i da dođem u dvoranu, posvetila mi je svoje
slobodno vrijeme jer je u meni vidjela dobar materijal. Podučavala me nekim osnovama koje su mi poslije trebale za
klasične varijacije: hajdemo sad vježbati dijagonale, hajdemo
vježbati manège... Uvježbavala me baš osnove tehnike ne bi li
me pripremila za nekakav budući solo. Pedagog je najvažnija
stvar. Dobar pedagog koji vas najprije uoči, a onda ima želju i
volju svoje znanje pretočiti u vas, to je najvažnije. Znači, Iraidu
Lukašovu doživljavam kao svoju baletnu mamu.
¬ Koga biste još izdvojili kao osobe koje su presudno utjecale na vašu karijeru?
razgovor: Edina Pličanić Jedan od prvih koreografa koji je meni uopće dao šansu
kao mladoj balerini u ansamblu naš je doajen, veliki umjetnik
Milko Šparemblek 2 . Dao mi je solističku ulogu u Trijumfu
Afrodite3 i tada su me svi zapravo prvi put zaista vidjeli i rekli:
ah, ona može nešto! I nakon toga sam plesala u gotovo svim
Šparemblekovim baletima. Zanimljivo je da sam u njegovoj
prvoj verziji baleta Johannes Faust Passion4 plesala djevojku
u Sretnom paru i ta je uloga kreirana za mene, a poslije sam
ubrzo plesala Margaretu i sad, evo, nakon petnaest godina i
Lilith, koju sam tada, kao mlada balerina, učila na probama
iza Almire Osmanović i Mateje Pučko. Izdvojila bih, naravno,
i Dinka Bogdanića koji je u pravo vrijeme, kad sam bila spremna da poletim, to opazio i osjetio da je pravi trenutak da mi
može dati sav teret nošenja prvih rola. Rekao je: „Ah, mala, ti
si spremna!” I u veoma kratkom roku otplesala sam ozbiljan
klasični repertoar prvih rola. I nakon toga još je jedan veliki
pedagog ostavio traga na mojoj tehnici i mojem baletnom
2
Milko Šparemblek baletni je plesač, pedagog, koreograf,
redatelj i dramaturg rođen 1928. Napustivši studij književnosti,
započinje baletno školovanje kod Ane Roje i Oskara Harmoša u
Zagrebu, gdje je 1947. angažiran u Hrvatskom narodnom kazalištu
kao baletni plesač. Od 1953. usavršavao se u Parizu, radeći s Olgom
Preobraženskom i Sergeom Perettijem, te postao prvim plesačem u
trupama Janine Charrat, Milorada Miškovića i Mauricea Béjarta.
Od 1955. stvara prve koreografije: Quatuor (na glazbu Raffaella
de Banfielda, 1957), Čovjek pred zrcalom (na glazbu Milka Kelemena, 1959), Ljubavnici iz Teruela (na glazbu Mikisa Theodorakisa,
snimljeno i za film 1961. u režiji Raymonda Rouleaua) i dr. Nakon
angažmana u Baletu dvadesetog stoljeća Mauricea Béjarta, gdje je
bio i baletni majstor, djelovao je kao koreograf u različitim baletnim
trupama, snimao televizijske filmove (primjerice Sedam smrtnih
grijeha na glazbu Kurta Weilla i libreto Bertolta Brechta, Očekivanje
na glazbu Arnolda Schönberga, Fedra na glazbu Georgesa Aurica,
Čudesni mandarin na glazbu Béle Bartóka). Bio je ravnatelj Baleta
Metropolitan opere u New Yorku (1971), Baleta Gulbenkian u Lisabonu (1970–75), Baleta u Lyonu (1977–80) i Baleta HNK-a u Zagrebu
(1992–94). Za Hrvatsku radioteleviziju režirao je i koreografirao
Mathilde (na glazbu Richarda Wagner), Chopeniadu (na glazbu
Frédérica Chopina), Gestu za Tina (na tekstove Tina Ujevića i glazbu
Igora Savina), Pjesme i plesove smrti (na glazbu Modesta Petroviča
Musorgskoga). U Baletu zagrebačkoga Hrvatskog narodnog kazališta
koreografirao je Opus 43 (na glazbu Ludwiga van Beethovena,
1975), Trijumf Afrodite (na glazbu Carla Orffa, 1975), Simfoniju psalama (na glazbu Igora Stravinskog, 1976), Pjesme ljubavi i smrti (na
glazbu Gustava Mahlera, 1981), Carmina Krležiana (na glazbu Frane
Paraća, 1987), Amadeus Monumentum (na glazbu Wolfganga Amadeusa Mozarta, 1990), Johannes Faust Passion (na glazbu Johanna
Sebastiana Bacha, nepoznatih srednjovjekovnih autora i Nevena
Frangeša, 2001. i 2015).
3
Milko Šparemblek prvi je put u Hrvatskom narodnom kazalištu u Zagrebu postavio Trijumf Afrodite 1975, a u obnovljenoj inačici
iz 1993. i u ponovljenim izvedbama te predstave plesala je Edina
Pličanić.
4
Predstava Johannes Faust Passion koju je Milko Šparemblek kreirao 2015. u Hrvatskom narodnom kazalištu u Zagrebu izmijenjena
je i dopunjena inačica istoimenog baleta koji je postavio 2001. na
sceni istog kazališta.
znanju, a to je Derek Deane 5 . On je bio od 2006. do 2012.
stalni koreograf našeg ansambla i sjajan, sjajan pedagog.
Znači, imala sam sreću da je došao k nama i prvo postavljao Trnoružicu, a ja sam bila u podjeli za Auroru. Posvetio
mi je mnogo vremena i mi smo stvarno sate i sate provodili
u dvorani, a s njim je fantastično raditi jer je u prvom redu
baš odličan pedagog za učvrstiti klasičnu tehniku. Radio je
sa mnom, ali sam pratila i dok bi radio s mojim partnerima i
shvatila koliko je rad s Derekom Deaneom koristan i vrijedan.
A uloga Trnoružice u njegovoj koreografiji meni je jedna je
od najzahtjevnijih klasičnih rola. Zato jer je to kristalno čista
klasična tehnika, što znači da ne možeš tu unijeti neku pretjeranu osobnost ili ovakvu ili onakvu interpretaciju. Zna se:
to je peta pozicija, to je passé, čiste pozicije ruku, najklasičnije
moguće, izduljene. A cijelo tijelo je malo prema naprijed... U
prvom činu Aurora pleše adagio s četvoricom prinčeva, onda
ide duga i teška varijacija, četiri piruete iz četvrte pozicije,
potom dugi dvostruki manège, prvi je s piquéima, a drugi s
jetéima en tournant, a kad to završi, onda veoma brzo slijedi koda. Mnogo je pas de chatova, onih s obama koljenima
gore... veoma zahtjevno, da. Kad Aurora u prvom činu u varijaciji izvodi u dijagonali četiri puta piruetu iz četvrte pozicije,
primjerice gledala sam zvijezdu Pariške opere Aurélie Dupont,
ona je nizala piruete tako da je prvu izvela kao jednu ili dvije,
drugu kao dvije, treću kao tri i na kraju četiri piruete. Uloga je
to koja se sastoji od bravura i omogućuje balerini da se igra sa
svojom tehnikom. Kao u attitudeu effacéeu u kojemu četiri
puta daje ruku, po jedanput svakom od četvorice prinčeva, i
drži svoj balans. Znači, ona je tijekom svih triju činova u pački
i to je baš izrazito čista, čista klasična rola koja me učvrstila
kao klasičnu plesačicu.
¬ Odettu/Odiliju u Labuđem jezeru na glazbu Petra Iljiča
Čajkovskoga prvi put plešete u koreografiji Dinka Bogdanića 2003.
Tako je. I to je bilo ostvarenje sna. Jer koliko je Julija bila
let, toliko je taj Labud za mene bio – rađanje, rađanje balerine
i mene kao primabalerine. Bogdanić mi je najavio: „Sljedeće
sezone plesat ćeš Labuda, premijerno.” Pripremala sam se šest
mjeseci. Premijera je bila u prosincu, a na kraju prethodne sezone u svibnju i lipnju počeli smo raditi na Labuđem jezeru, u
kojem sam s Iraidom Lukašovom uvježbavala varijacije Crnog
labuda i Bijelog labuda. Imala sam cijelo ljeto pred sobom i
ponijela sam na more videorekorder, tada smo još imali vi5
Britanski baletni plesač, koreograf i pedagog Derek Deane
surađivao je s Baletom Hrvatskog narodnog kazališta u Zagrebu
postavljajući Trnoružicu (2006), Labuđe jezero (2007), Pepeljugu
(2007) i Orašara (2011) na glazbu Petra Iljiča Čajkovskoga, Damu s
kamelijama (2008) na glazbu Carla Davisa i Paquitu (2011) na glazbu
Ludwiga Minkusa, Riccarda Driga, Léa Delibesa, Yulija Gerbera,
Alekseja Papkova, Nikolaja Čerepnina.
Movements 23 | 24 _ 225
deorekordere, i sve vrijeme gledala VHS-kasetu sa snimkom
Natalije Makarove u Labuđem jezeru. I onda je došla sezona i
premijera u kojoj mi je ponovno, kao u Romeu i Juliji, partner
bio Jaš Otrin. Plesao je Princa i to je opet bio dobar izbor jer
sam uz njegovu staturu i visinu izgledala fantastično krhko.
Proporcije su u baletu jako važne. A tom sam se Labuđem
baš posvetila i bilo mi je divno... U to doba čak sam vodila
dnevnik, jer sam znala da je to posebno razdoblje – ostvarenje sna. Vodila sam dnevnik u koji sam zapisivala korekcije,
svoje i Iraide Lukašove, i sjećam se zapisa u kojem nju vidim
kako škilji ispod očiju i onako me promatra i pokušava stvoriti
nekakvu sfumato sliku da me može još u nečemu korigirati.
Nevjerojatno je mudra bila, predivne stvari mi je govorila,
imam predivne zapise iz tog vremena.
¬ Vaše mišljenje o filmu Crni labud (2010) u režiji Darrena
Aronofskoga?
Obožavam taj film. Ubrajam se u grupaciju ljudi koje je
taj film oduševio. Jasno mi je što neki ljudi ne vole u njemu,
smeta ih možda prenaglašeno pretjerivanje da je plesačica
u poziciji da mora ne znam što sve napraviti za rolu, da je
izložena koječemu... No meni su se dopali psihološki aspekti
filma, jer je Nina toliko opsjednuta stvaranjem role da sam
se prisjetila sebe. Kad se odlučite posvetiti ulogama Odette
i Odilije, vi u tome razdoblju jeste Bijeli labud, vi jeste taj
Crni labud. Iznenadilo me koliko je duboko redatelj ušao u
problematiku Labuđeg jezera. U filmu se isključivo koristi
glazbom Čajkovskoga i jako mi se svidio način na koji ju je
primjenjivao. Ako se film ne gleda površno, mislim da je sjajan. I dopao mi se kraj filma kad je Nina samu sebe probola,
a to je tako jedna dobra metafora, znači da moraš do kraja
poništiti sebe, ubiti sebe, da bi se iznjedrio, da bi poletio pravi
labud. Moraš potpuno pobijediti samu sebe da bi ta ptica
izletjela, poletjela iz vas. I to mi je genijalno! Jer da, nakon
tih Labuđih jezera znam da koliko god se osjećaš samljeveno
toliko ti duša nekamo gore odleti. I ponovit ću, iznenadilo
me kako je redatelj pogodio u srž, a znamo da to nije sam
iskusio, iznenadilo me kako je duboko ušao u tematiku. U
tu opsesiju rolom. Ja, recimo, kad bih pripremala Labuđe
jezero, bila bih potpuno u tome. Zato sam sa svojim bliskim
prijateljima izašla na ulicu i fotografirala se kao Crni labud,
jer mi je zanimljiva ta tema. Kad spremam rolu, toliko sam
duboko u njoj da na ulici djelujem možda uobičajeno, ali u
glavi sam ta rola. I zato mi je bilo interesantno da doslovno
u kostimu izađem na ulicu kao obična prolaznica, a zapravo
sam Labud. Jer da, kad me vidite na ulici, naoko sam obična
prolaznica, ali u glavi sam ili Labud ili Julija ili Giselle. I taj
dio mi je strašno uzbudljiv. Tako da taj film... film je odličan.
¬ Na izvedbi obnovljene Giselle u koreografiji Iraide Lukašove (prema Jeanu Coralliju i Julesu Perrotu, u redakciji
226 _ Kretanja 23 | 24
Mariusa Petipaa) bila sam 21. siječnja 2014. Te su večeri
plesali: Giselle – Ekaterina Borchenko, gošća iz sanktpeterburškoga Mihajlovskoga teatra, a grofa Albrechta prvak
stuttgartskog baleta Friedemann Vogel. U stanci nakon
prvoga čina, u kojem Giselle umire od plesa i ljubavi, opazila sam vas u gledalištu kako brišete suze. Dvostruko mi
se to učinilo fascinantnim: nakon toliko gledanih izvedaba
Giselle još vas toliko duboko gane taj balet, a osim toga vi
ste plesali Giselle već jednu od sljedećih večeri i očekivalo
bi se da izvedbu promatrate s nekom vrstom profesionalne
distanciranosti.
Giselle je divna rola i u njoj se također umire, a nekako
volim dramatične role i te večeri se dogodila kazališna magija.
Osim toga, kad gledam balet, jednako kao kad plešem, prepuštam se stvarno i potpuno. Emotivna sam strašno, balerina
je te večeri bila nevjerojatno dramska i iskrena, osjetila sam to
i baš me uzela. Volim ekspresivne balerine i volim emotivne
balerine. I mogu se prisjetiti da je od samog početka kad sam
krenula u baletnu školu bilo tako... Na našoj televiziji emitirao
se serijal o baletu koji je vodila Natalija Makarova i u kojem
je govorila o cijeloj baletnoj profesiji. Natalija Makarova me
od najranijih nogu oduševljavala, ona je čista klasičarka, ali
jednako tako ekspresivna i emotivna balerina. I obožavam
Silvie Guillem, ona je za mene ultima, apsolutna balerina
koja je briljantna u klasici, briljantna u slobodi plesanja suvremenog baleta. Baš ima neku snagu. Kad ju gledam – to
ima smisla. Što god da radi.
¬
Vaš odnos prema publici?
Publiku doživljavam kao jedan od najvažnijih dijelova teatra, kao sudionika predstave. Predstave nema bez publike.
Nekad je to samo masa u mraku, ali to je živo stvorenje, koje
iz toga mraka diše, očekuje... Ili kao neko veliko oko ili bilo
koje upija događaje na pozornici. Jer što smo mi bez publike?
Mi sve te emocije u ples pretačemo za publiku.
¬ Kako komentirate mišljenja da je klasičnobaletna tehnika
nasilna, da muči tijelo?
Definitivno, to jest nasilje nad tijelom. (smijeh) Ali to
je tako. Na to sam pristala zato jer sam mogla, mogla sam
se nositi sa zahtjevima baleta. Imala sam želju i fizičke predispozicije da usvojim tu vještinu. Na balet gledam kao na
vještinu u kojoj postoje zakonitosti, sustav plesanja. Moj
odgovor na pitanje zašto plešem balet jest zato jer to mogu.
A užitak je u pobjedi nad fizikalnim zakonima ili točnije – u
harmoniji s njima.
¬
Koja je razlika u plesu na špici i u mekanoj papuči?
Kad plešete na špici, često ste na poluprstima i na punom
stopalu, kao i u mekanim papučama, jedino je osjetilni dio
stopala manji jer je stopalo u špici dosta stisnuto. Na vjež-
razgovor: Edina Pličanić Movements 23 | 24 _ 227
bama volim kombinirati rad u mekanim papučama i na špici.
U mekanim papučama zato da osjetim metatarzalne kosti...
Jer da biste se popeli na špicu, morate proći sve stadije koje
možete proći u mekanoj papuči, jedino što u njoj ne možete baš plesati na samim vršcima prstiju. Na špici je osjećaj
izvlačenja tijela, onaj dio od bokova do rebara, naglašen, a
kad ste u mekanoj papuči, osjetite guranje u pod i trebate se,
da to tako nazovem, izvlačiti iz poda. Ali jedno se na drugo
nadovezuje i jedno drugo nadopunjava.
¬
Jeste li plesali bosi?
Oh, da... Primjerice u Šparemblekovu Čudesnom madarinu. Uloga Djevojke se od početka predstave pleše na špici,
a kad na kraju doživljava katarzu, skida periku, skida špice i
ostaje bosa. Vraća se sama sebi. I pleše, naravno. Ali volim i
u svakodnevnom životu hodati bosa. Ako sam u prirodi, na
travnjaku ili na stijenama, kamenju, obvezno skidam obuću,
volim taj neposredni dodir, to uzemljenje.
¬
Kako doživljavate proces starenja?
Samo tijelo daje sve odgovore. Ali najprije ne želiš prihvatiti da se ono mijenja. Neke se stvari poboljšavaju, a druge
pogoršavaju. Snaga i mišićna aktivnost opadaju, metabolizam
je sporiji, a opet iskustvo donosi to da imaš veliku arhivu
pokreta u sebi i bolju kontrolu i koncentraciju. I to je divno!
Svaki dio karijere ima svoje prednosti. Kao mladi plesač vladaš snagom i nosi te želja, a kao zreliji plesač promišljeniji si
i čak možda i više uživaš.
¬ Teško ste se ozlijedili 2008. na jednoj od generalnih
proba baleta Dama s kamelijama.
Da... Derek Deane je ulogu Marguerite Gautier kreirao
za Milku Hribar i ja sam tu rolu uvježbavala iza nje, ali bez
partnera. U jednom je trenutku Milka Hribar bila iznurena
procesom rada i generalnim probama pa su mi predložili da
plešem sljedeću od tih proba. I ja sam, vjerojatno iz egoističnih pobuda, jer me dotad nisu zapazili, nitko se nije bavio
mojom ulogom, nisu mi pridavali pozornost, rekla sebi: sad
ću im pokazati. I usudila sam se napraviti scensku probu
s partnerom prima vista. I to je prošlo dobro te su trebale slijediti dvotjedne svakodnevne probe kako bih potpuno
svladala ulogu kao alternacija. Onda su na još jednoj generalnoj probi s orkestrom shvatili da je Milka Hribar ponovno
preumorna, pa sam ja plesala tu orkestralnu probu, a nisam
bila tjelesno spremna za nju, niti sam prošla proces pripreme uloge. Pri odskoku, kad trebam letjeti partneru u ruke,
dogodila se rotacija u koljenu i puknuli su mi prednji križni
ligamenti. Uslijedila je operacija, oporavak, jačanje, godinu
dana sam izbivala sa scene. No 2009. sam se vratila, najprije
u Orašara, a na kraju sezone i u Damu s kamelijama. Ta me
ozljeda naučila da nisam nepoderiva, da imam slabe točke
228 _ Kretanja 23 | 24
u tijelu, da moram biti oprezna... na što, naravno, jako brzo
zaboravite i krenete po starom običaju. No svako toliko me to
koljeno podsjeti da mu se moram posvetiti, tako da vježbam i
u teretani na dodatnom jačanju mišića. Jer to je lijevo koljeno
potporne noge, na lijevoj nozi primjerice otplešete cijeli drugi
čin Labuđeg jezera... Na toj je nozi odvrćeno ne znam koliko
tisuća fouettéa tijekom cijele karijere... Moram pronaći način
kako više plesati na desnoj nozi. (smijeh)
¬ Pored amblematskih klasičnobaletnih naslova plesali
ste i koreografije Nacha Duata, Edwarda Cluga, Pascala
Touzeaua, Huga Viere. A 2011. plesali ste u koreografiji
Pet tanga Hansa van Manena.
Uživala sam u tome. Osobito u drugom tangu kad sam
na sceni sama s osmoricom partnera i moram dominirati. To
je scena u kojoj zapravo utjelovljujem smrt, onu koja sve uzima, a ta uloga mi je bila bliska zbog uloge Dame u crvenom
iz baleta Milka Šparembleka Pjesme ljubavi i smrti. Čak su
se i boje nekako podudarale. Dama u crvenom je u crvenoj
haljini, naravno, a u tangu smo imali crveno-crne kostime,
i imala sam identičnu frizuru u jednoj i drugoj koreografiji,
tako da su mi te dvije uloge bile bliske jedna drugoj. Hans
van Manen upotrebljava šake kao jednu cjelinu, a ne kao u
klasičnom baletu gdje su treći prst i palac malo unutra, uostalom kao i Šparemblek. Inače je ta koreografija postavljana
prema našoj balerini koja je ostvarila međunarodnu karijeru
Sonji Marchiolli, a koja je baš u to doba kad smo postavljali
Pet tanga nama vodila vježbe. Koreografiju je prenosila van
Manenova asistentica Mea Venema, a Hans van Manen je
došao na dvije probe prije premijere i njegove su korekcije
pogađale u srž pokreta. Nikad neću zaboraviti što nam je
rekao za rond de jambe na devedeset stupnjeva, jer danas
plesači rade rond na sto dvadeset ili čak na sto osamdeset
stupnjeva. Van Manen je rekao da najviše voli rond de jambe
na tek malo više od devedeset stupnjeva jer ga onda vidi,
a kad je previsok, zapravo se ne vidi što se događa. Na devedeset stupnjeva mnogo je šira putanja noge. Otad uvijek
radim adagio misleći na njegove riječi. Pet tanga jedina je
van Manenova koreografija koju sam plesala, voljela bih da
sam plesala i druge.
¬
Koreograf s kojim biste željeli surađivati?
Mats Ek. Definitivno – Mats Ek. Njegova Trnoružica najbolja mi je od svih inačica koje sam vidjela. Mekoća tijela njegovih plesača, organska mehanika pokreta, to mi je najljepše
u njegovim koreografijama.
¬ Kako ste pripremali naslovnu ulogu u baletu Ana Karenjina 6 u koreografiji Lea Mujića?
6
Vidjeti bilješku br. 3 na str. 217.
razgovor: Edina Pličanić Ana Karenjina... Da, mogla bih reći, jedna od mojih najdražih rola. Rad na njoj bio je predivan zato što sam se s koreografom7 već dugo poznavala i znao je moje mogućnosti.
Dramaturginja 8 je bila fantastično jasna, jako je dobro i točno
razložila što želi, kako će se redati scene, tako da je to bilo
definirano, a ja sam se posvetila roli čitajući knjigu, usporedno s probama. Našla sam roman, Tolstojevu Anu Karenjinu,
skinula prašinu s ona dva toma 9 što su stajala na polici od
majčine mladosti, prionula čitati knjigu i – uživala sam u njoj.
A vratila sam si i najranija sjećanja kad sam bila mala djevojčica. Moja je mama obožavala film Ana Karenjina s Gretom
Garbo. I taj je među prvim filmovima koje sam vidjela. A
Greta Garbo za mene je dan-danas najveći pojam. Moram
priznati da sam ju u radu na ulozi Ane Karenjine često imala
pred očima, onu njezinu otmjenost. I kako je očima tumačila ulogu. Naravno da sam pogledala i druge filmske verzije,
i ovu najnoviju10 koja je dosta moderna, brza, s drukčijom
interpretacijom Ane, ali meni su ostale dominantnim Greta i
sama knjiga. I iako je naš balet na špici, on apsolutno dodiruje
suvremeni balet, dodiruje ga u slobodi, slobodi interpretacije,
a Leo Mujić je definitivno koreograf suvremenog baleta. Bez
obzira na to što primjenjuje klasičnu špicu, jako je suvremen.
I opet je najljepša od svega bila kreacija... A koliko god sam
crpila inspiraciju iz Grete Garbo i romana, toliko sam ju crpila
i iz svojih partnera, iznimnih Karenjina i Vronskoga. Plesali su
ih nevjerojatno dobar portugalski plesač Guilherme Gameiro Alves i predivan mađarski plesač Tamás Darai. Nas troje
nekako smo se spojili i zaokružili našu verziju Ane Karenjine.
¬ Nakon završetka izvedbe Ane Karenjine 19. studenoga
2014. promovirani ste u nacionalnu baletnu prvakinju i u
svome obraćanju publici rekli ste da vam je i te večeri bilo
zadovoljstvo umrijeti za njih. Naime, na samome kraju predstave vi kao da nestajete pod reflektorom koji se spušta.
Ta završna scena neočekivan je i dramaturški odličan izbor. Obožavam to, obožavam se rastopiti pod tim svjetlom,
to mi je fantastična metafora. Pruža mi baš pravo umjetničko
zadovoljstvo.
Katja Šimunić, nakon završene Škole za balet i ritmiku
7
Leo Mujić, vidjeti bilješku br. 6 na str. 218.
8
Valentina Turcu, vidjeti bilješku br. 5 na str. 218.
9
Lav Nikolajevič Tolstoj, Ana Karenjina, knjiga prva i druga,
preveo Krunoslav Pranjić, Zagreb, NZMH, 1976.
10 Film Ana Karenjina (2012) u režiji Joea Wrighta s Keirom
Knightley u naslovnoj ulozi; plesne scene koreografirao je Sidi Larbi
Cherkaoui.
/ Odjel za ritmiku i ples diplomirala je dramaturgiju na Akademiji dramske umjetnosti u Zagrebu i magistrirala teoriju
plesa na Sveučilištu Pariz 8 u Francuskoj. Plesna praktičarka
(koreografkinja i redateljica) i teoretičarka (nezavisna istraživačica, urednica u časopisu za plesnu umjetnost Kretanja,
autorica i voditeljica u radijskoj emisiji Na kraju tjedna Trećeg
programa Hrvatskog radija, suradnica portala Plesnascena.
hr itd.), analizira ples transdisciplinarno, supostavljajući ga
drugim umjetnostima, medijima i diskursima.
Movements 23 | 24 _ 229
performance: Anna Karenina
performance: Anna Karenina < Anna Karenina, Photo: Ines and Saša Novković >
KATJA ŠIMUNIĆ
Brilliant
Self-Destruction
of Anna Arkadyevna
Karenina
On the ballet Anna Karenina choreographed by Leo Mujić
“And the light by which she had read the book filled
with troubles, falsehoods, sorrow, and evil, flared up
more brightly than ever before, lighted up for her all that
had been in darkness, flickered, began to grow dim, and
was quenched forever.”1
Entrance
hrough one of the white lacquered doors of the
Zagreb Neo-Baroque theatre, through which the
noisy and cheerful première audience entered
recently to find their seats in the stalls, enters a svelte,
fair-haired, smiling countess Anna Arkadyevna Karenina,
embodied in the principal dancer2 of the Zagreb ballet
– Edina Pličanić. She slowly walks towards proscenium
covered by snow and lightened by a strong beam of light
T
1
Leo Tolstoy, Anna Karenina, translated by Constance Garnett,
Manybooks net, Project Gutenberg edition. p. 650.
2
At the time of the première of Anna Karenina, Edina Pličanić
had the rank of principal dancer of the Croatian National Theatre in
Zagreb, but a few months later she was awarded the title of national
principal dancer, in the hierarchy of this theatre the highest rank,
comparable to danseuse étoile in the Paris Opera.
alongside rows of spectators waiting for the beginning of
the full-length ballet3 about Tolstoy’s “infernal and fabu3
The text pertains to the opening night of the ballet Anna
Karenina in the Croatian National Theatre in Zagreb on 4 April
2014. Choreographer: Leo Mujić; stage adaptation of the novel and
dramaturgy: Valentina Turcu; stage design: Ivan Kirinčić; costume design: Alan Hranitelj; lighting designer: Aleksandar Čavlek;
choreographer’s assistant. Ilja Louwen; ballet masters: Suzana Bačić, Andrej Barbanov. Countess Anna Arkadyevna Karenina: Edina
Pličanić; Count Alexei Kirillovitch Vronsky: Tamás Darai; Count
Alexei Alexandrovitch Karenin: Guilherme Gameiro Alves; Princess
Ekaterina Alexandrovna Shtcherbatskaya: Iva Vitić Gameiro; Count
Konstantin Dmitrevitch Levin: Kornel Palinko; Prince Stepan
Arkadyevitch Oblonsky: Robert Bruist; Princess Darya Alexandrovna Oblonskaya: Petra Vargović Stanciu; Countess Lidia Ivanovna:
Mirna Sporiš; Princess Elizaveta Fedorovna Tverskaya: Pavla Pećušak; Countess Vronskaya: Mihaela Devald; General Serpuhovsky:
Valentin Stoica; Princess Sorokina: Jelena Lečić; Marya Efimovna,
nanny: Valentina Štrok; Seryozha, Anna’s son: Bartol Schönberger
Movements 23 | 24 _ 231
lous” heroine in the theatre with golden plastering and red
velvet upholstered chairs. In a black cloak, a letter in her
hand, she climbs to the front part of the stage, while the
rest of the stage behind her is screened with purple curtain.
In the quietness of spectators’ breathing she reads silently
a letter for a few moments and then suddenly, behind her,
synchronously with the music of Pyotr Ilyich Tchaikovsky
the curtain raises to reveal a frenzied scene of Moscow
society life on a skating rink. Through flashes of quick
lifts, running glissades and dangerous evasions of dancing
pairs on the ballet floor, over which they run daringly like
on ice, we recognize the intimate drama of the deceived
wife, but also a simple, sober and practical woman who
wants to save her marriage, countess Darya Alexandrovna
Oblonskaya – Dolly, in the safe and warm performance
of Petra Vargović Stanciu. The guilty party in the adultery
is Anna Karenina’s brother; count Stepan Arkadyevitch
Oblonsky, sensual enjoyer of life, in a witty performance
of Robert Bruist. He is the sender of the letter from the
beginning of the performance in which he begs his sister
Anna to come to Moscow from St. Petersburg and try to
alleviate the unpleasant situation caused by his infidelity.
Narration con brio
t the moment when Anna Karenina steps from
snowy St. Petersburg proscenium to Moscow
scene, the social dancing crowd at the skating
rink swiftly transforms into the railway station scene, into
her encounter with her brother and introduction to count
Vronsky, with whose mother she has been travelling
in the same compartment and talking for a long time
from St. Petersburg to Moscow. Such furious dramatic
introduction exposes straightaway the title heroine and
her future lover but also the characters who will weave
the vertiginous backplane where the auto-destruction
of love of Anna Arkadyevna Karenina will take place.
Vronsky’s mother is danced by Mihaela Devald with
a grotesquely aristocratic gestures, extremely impressively, with a boldly over accentuated miming of constant
talk and aggressive chat while not realising that her son
Alexey is not listening to her at all, that all his senses
have already been completely taken by the appearance of
A
(pupil from the School for Classical Ballet in Zagreb); Doctor: Andrej Barbanov. Lovers: Dan Rus, Ovidiu Muscalu, Daniil Yastrebov,
Eugen Dobrescu, Adam Harris. Women: Ivančica Alajbeg, Marija
Breščanović, Sabrina Feichter, Mai Kageyama, Ksenija Krutova,
Mutsumi Matsuhisa, Rieka Suzuki, Atina Tanović, Simona Unterajter, Dunja Novković. Civilians: Dan Rus, Ovidiu Muscalu, Sven
Copony. Officers: Eugen Dobrescu, George Baldovin, Adam Harris.
Governors and servants: Dan Boeru, Alen Gotal, Andrija Palada,
Emilija Sorić, Siniša Bosnar, Domagoj Vrbljanin, Daniil Yastrebov,
Arcadie Belenco, Danijela Batur.
232 _ Kretanja 23 | 24
Karenina. When the back light shows the site of the accident of a track worker for whose tragedy nobody seems to
have time for and over whom carelessly steps vehement,
fun-seeking Elizaveta Fedorovna Tverskaya - Betsy in an
enthusiastic self-confident dance of Pavla Pećušak, already
then, in a hurry, the ball commences. The chandeliers are
dropped down, dresses flutter and another public space
opens following the looks of mothers, relatives and many
other followers of decorum and social rules approving
close contacts of the bodies of girls and boys who are
dancing their duets, often as direct lovers’ negotiations.
Valentina Turcu establishes the ballet libretto of
Anna Karenina, the work of Lev Nikolayevich Tolstoy
that Orhan Pamuk4 for instance, and he was not the
only one, defines as the greatest work of all novel art,
with a lot of sense and sensibility, to remain in the field
of literary associations. Valentina Turcu5 is herself first
and foremost an excellent dancer, then a sophisticated
choreographer and here she is a sensitive dramaturgue
who condenses a masterly thousand page narrative work
by breaking contextual scenes of the 19th century Russian
social life through simultaneity of scenic events sensibly
compressed into short scenes. She also creates a pliable
map for dance unfolding of emotional relations and psychological portraits of the fatal triangle Alexey Alexandrovitch Karenin – Anna Arkadyevna Karenina – Alexey
4
In the essay “Što to radi naš um kad čitamo roman (“What Our
Mind Does When We Read a Novel”) from the lectures at the Harvard University in 2009 collected in the book Naivni i sentimentalni
romanopisac (The Naïve and the Sentimental Novelist, Faber & Faber,
2011), Zagreb: Vuković & Runjić, 2013.
5
Valentina Turcu was born in Zagreb. Her parents Maja Srbljenović and Marin Turcu were principal dancers of the Croatian
National Theatre in Zagreb. At the age of nineteen she entered
L’Ecole-atelier Rudra Béjart in Lausanne, where she perfected her
technique and danced a number of roles in Maurice Béjart’s ballets.
A great part of her career is linked to the Slovene National Theatre
in Maribor, where she danced a number of multi- awarded roles.
Among her work as a choreographer Sergei Prokofiev’s Romeo and
Julliet (2012) needs to be singled out. She staged the same ballet
in cooperation with Leo Mujić in the Latvian National Ballet in
Riga in 2014 and in the theatre Opéra-Théâtre de Metz Métropole
in 2015. In the ballet of the Croatian National Theatre in Split she
staged Ravel’s Bolero in 2009 and Shchedrin’s Carmen in 2011 that
she recreated for the Maribor ballet again in 2014. She staged the
choreography of Leave Me to the music of Georg Friedrich Händel as
a part of the evening devoted to international stars in the London
Convent Garden Dance Company in 2012. She is also preparing the
ballet Pierrot Lunaire by Arnold Schönberg for the same company.
She dramatized Leo Tolstoy’s, Anna Karenina and together with Leo
Mujić she selected the music for the ballet Anna Karenina (2012) in
the Croatian National Theatre in Zagreb. Valentina Turcu and Leo
Mujić co-authored the staging of the ballet Dangerous Liasons at
the Dubrovnik Summer Festival in co-production with the Slovene
National Theatre in Maribor and the Ljubljana Festival (2014).
performance: Anna Karenina Kirillovitch Vronsky. On such dramatic background Leo
Mujić6 opens the carnal and possessive love of Anna
Arkadyevna towards Alexey Kirillovitch Vronsky into
luxuriant dancing scenes that at times border with the
corporal liberation of contemporary dance. Leo Mujić
choreographs his Anna Karenina as an excellent connoisseur of academic ballet technique through whose
dancer’s body passed modern ballet and contemporary
ballet and post-neoclassical ballet gestures of the artists
like Maurice Béjart, Mats Ek, Nacho Duato, Jiři Kylián,
and primus inter pares when the legibility of influences
to Mujić is at issue – William Forsythe. Within such an
eclectic approach, every now and then emotional strokes
of the action of dancing corporeity flash and dramatically
colour and make distinctive Mujić’s expression.
Joint author selection of dramaturgue and choreographer of the parts of the work of Pyotr Ilyich Tchaikovsky
that were not written for ballet7 stresses the sensitivity
6
After he had finished a ballet school in Belgrade Leo Mujić
graduated at the L’Ecole-atelier Rudra Béjart in Lausanne. He danced in choreographies of dance artists like Maurice Béjart, Alessi
Silvestrin, Jacopo Godani, Marguerite Donlon, Jiři Kylián, William
Forsythe, Mats Ek, Ohad Naharin, Amanda Mueller, Jean Christophe Blavier, Blanca Lee, Nach Duat, Carolyn Carlson, Philippe Decouflé and others. He builds his dancing career parallely to that of
a choreographer. He choreographed ballet performances for Berlin
State Ballet, Slovene National Theatre in Ljubljana, Zurich University of the Arts, solo for Tamas Nagy in Dutch National Ballet in
Amsterdam, solo for Aurélie Dupont in the Paris Opera, the ballet
Change me to the music of Johann Sebastian Bach for Jacob’s Pillow
Dance Festival in Massachusetts, solo for David Hollberg, principal
dancer of the American Ballet Theatre in New York, duet for Drew
Jacoby and Rubinald Pronk and so on. He was a guest pedagogue in
many ballet ensembles and schools, for instance in Slovene National
Theatre in Ljubljana, Croatian National Theatre in Zagreb, Comic
Opara Berlin, Berlin State Opera, City Theatre Bolzano, Opera Studio in Tokyo and Fukuoka and others. As an acknowledged independent artist he frequently performs at ballet concerts, for instance in
Malakhov & Friends, Stars of the 21st Century in Toronto, World Stars
in Budapest, in Queensland Ballet in Brisbane, Australia, at international gala concert in Taipei, annual gala concert in Dortmund,
gala concert Stars of the Stuttgart Ballet and many others. He creates
his own choreographies for these performances and most often his
partner is Ilja Louwen. She frequently works with him as assistant
choreographer in ballet performances. In Croatia Leo Mujić choreographed Pour homme et femme in the Croatian National Theatre Ivan
pl. Zajc in Rijeka, a performance that was the result of cooperation
with the choreographer Maša Kolar (2013). With Valentina Turcu he
co-authored the ballet Dangerous Liasons at the Dubrovnik Summer
Festival in co-production with the Slovene National Theatre in Maribor and the Ljubljana Festival (2014). In the ballet of the Croatian
National Theatre in Zagreb he staged a short ballet Go and See in
2008 and a full-length ballet The Silence of My Murmur in 2011 and
a full-length ballet Anna Karenina in 2014. Leo Mujić was invited
to be the guest artist in the ballet of the Croatian National Theatre
Ivan pl. Zajc in Rijeka for the season 2015/2016.
7
Russian composer Rodion Shchedrin was the first to reach for
Tolstoy’s novel Anna Karenina as a model for a ballet score and dedi-
but also the clarity of the dance-dramatic structure, that
simultaneously provides a romantically and metrically
structured base of this one and a half hour ballet divided
into two parts, created to dance en pointe. Consistently
compressed narration clearly presents the events and the
vocabulary of academic ballet in friction with post-neoclassical dislocation accentuates the outrightness and
precision of dance gesture.
Parallelism of Karenin and Vronsky
ithin the classically permeated dance procédé
displaced from its fundamental centre, in the
today already established Forsythe dance
subversion of gravitation axis Mujić supremely uses the
vocabulary appropriated in numerous performances as
interpreter, dancer, and he is not afraid to add to this
contemporary dance idiom, the one of the anachronistic
source: mime gesture and mime scenes. He positions
them within dance parts, as a kind of psychological surplus that creates tension in the postponement of the much
expected dance resumption. For instance, the scene of
drinking tea is so artificial in the simulation of the intimacy of marriage that this short pantomime stylisation
discloses all the complex discordance of the relationship
and satiates the space with the longing to move. It gets
crazy, for instance, when Karenin is left alone in the
room after Anna Arkadyevna flew first in her thoughts,
and then also with her body to her lover.
Leo Mujić and Valentina Turcu innovatively explained
and moved count Alexey Alexandrovitch Karenin as a
strong and strikingly handsome husband, not at all boring and exclusively consistent to social conventions. His
character was built on the contrast of public and personal: in social situations he is withdrawn, restrained, controlling his emotions, but in intimate scenes of solitude
all his suppressed horribly hurt feelings and true desire
to keep his wife burst, in the powerful and distressing
W
cated it to his wife, prima ballerina Maya Plisetskaya, who danced
the title role and choreographed the world première of the ballet
Anna Karenina in the Big Theatre in Moscow in 1972.Towards the
end of the same year Dimitrije Parlić staged his own choreographic
version to Shchedrin’s music with the Belgrade ballet and Alexei
Ratmansky transformed the same music into the ballet Anna Karenina with the Royal Danish Ballet in Copenhagen in 2004. The music
of Pyotr Ilyich Tchaikovsky for the ballet staging of Tolstoy’s novel
was used by André Prokovsky for the version of Anna Karenina
with the Australian Ballet in Melbourne in 1979, Boris Eifman for
the première of Anna Karenina with his own ballet company in St.
Petersburg in 2005. Valentina Turcu and Leo Mujić also chose from
Tchaikovsky’s works for the ballet Anna Karenina in 2014, and in
the season 2014/2015 choreographer Christian Spuck staged Anna
Karenina with the ballet of the Opera House Zurich, using mainly
the works of Sergei Rachmaninoff and Witold Lutosławski.
Movements 23 | 24 _ 233
performance of the ballet dancer of a refined personality
- Guilherme Gameiro Alves.
Vronsky is juxtaposed to Karenin, a young man of
romantic appearance and a softer bodily expression,
downright predestined for the idealization that is at
work at the beginning of being in love. Thus the exaltation of Anna Karenina is extremely convincing, although
not reasonable or understandable, her bewilderment at
the ball, her powerless striving not the look for Vronsky, trying to avoid him unsuccessfully in a fatal touch
announced by dangerously close embrace during the
dance that possessed the ballrooms in the middle of the
nineteenth century – vertiginous waltz.
The embodiment of Karenin as a desirable man additionally strengthens the tragedy of adulterous escapism
of Anna Karenina, and the choreography of Vronsky as
a gently persevering lover, in a subtle interpretation of a
very young and very talented ballet dancer Tamás Darai,
ends this tragic pas de trois.
Contemporary philosopher Slavoj Žižek at his lecture
about his drama on Antigone8 spoke how important it
was to read old works introducing change, to tell an
original story in a different way: that the only proper
reaction is “to step out of the known perspective”. Presenting Karenin as a handsome man and establishing
equilibrium between him and Vronsky is the stepping
out of the known perspective which makes the obsession
and possessiveness of Anna Karenina towards her lover,
her unswerving delusion even more horrible.
Dreaminess of Kitty Shtcherbatskaya
he counterpoint to the charming, conscious womanhood of Anna Karenina is a completely young
and wonderfully naïve princess Ekaterina Alexandrovna Shtcherbatskaya – Kitty. Uninhibited in her
dance movement, guilelessly happy, demure, obviously
in love with Vronsky, disarmingly honest Kitty Shtcherbatskaya in the interpretation of Iva Vitić Gameiro is an
extremely important part of the performance. Her striving
to turn Vronsky’s head towards her with her hand is
dramatic while he is looking at Anna Karenina who is
trying in vain not to get lost in the destructive infatuation. Kitty’s pain in the broken lines of arms and hands
in the impulses that shake her supple torso is touching.
Iva Vitić Gameiro amalgamates in her body the classical
ballet skill and contemporary dance freedom and she will
T
8
Slavoj Žižek was the guest in the programme of the Philosophical Theatre in the Croatian National Theatre in Zagreb on 17 January 2015. In his talk with Srećko Horvat he presented his drama
version, actually three of them, of Sophocles’ Antigone, that should
have its world première in that very theatre.
234 _ Kretanja 23 | 24
later during the play model with a sophisticated dance
gesture her collection from the despair of hurt feelings
into, again honest drowning into unconditional love of
count Konstantin Dmitrievitch Levin, into marital life
with him. Kornel Palinko did not have a lot of dance space
to make more complex that role of eternally suspicious
giant of goodness and reflective centre of the novel, but
he managed with his miniatures to bring in adequate
intellectual, starry-eyed Levin.
Excellence and focus of each individual dancer who
move either social or psychological landscape of the
tragedy of Anna Arkadyevna Karenina, including the
boy Bartol Schönberger in the role of her son Seryozha
should be stressed. We also need to single out countess
Lydia Ivanovna in dark mystical performance of Mirna
Sporiš or ardent dancing performance of ballerinas like
Sabrina Feichter, Mai Kageyama, Atina Tanović, Rieka
Suzuki or Ksenija Krutova in the scenes of skating rink,
ball, race track, theatre, because their energy, explosive
and technical-expressive readiness build a necessary pretext or a pre-movement to solo creations.
Bold Fragility of Anna Arkadyevna Karenina
allerina per se, Edina Pličanić interpreted many
emblematic roles of romantic, classical, neo-classical and modern ballet in her twenty-year career,
and for the creation of the dancing corporeity of Anna
Karenina she undoubtedly also has the role of the essential
creator of the part. With minute technical elaboration,
unconditional devotion and representation of the title
heroine, Edina Pličanić embodied refined and fragile,
enraptured and passionate Anna Karenina, uncovering
in her dance imagery the quivers of contemporary dance
outbreaks in the moments when the body staggers under
a gust of emotions. Let us single out the scene of making love to Karenin, her dead body on the floor reacting
idiosyncratically to the attempts of loving touches, in
contrast to her sensual duet with Vronsky and her sighs
of pleasure at the racing track, while the Horse in Motion
by Eadweard Muybridge is being projected in the background and the dancers we saw earlier at the skating
rink and ball are following that race their backs turned to
the audience with cheering gestures that shine through
the counterlight. Or the suffering of Anna Karenina for
her son, determination to see him despite her husband’s
refusal, the way she is torn between her commitment to
Karenin and her love to Vronsky, her literal stretching
between the arms of her husband and her lover at the end
of the first part of the performance to the organ music
of the symphony Manfred. Edina Pličanić dances each of
these scenes with renewed strength and newly-found
B
performance: Anna Karenina values of dance expression, with unforeseeable gusts of
fragile dance gesture and bold virtuosity at the same time.
One of the dominant scenes is the one where the
lovers escape to Italian idyll, where under a seemingly
shiny surface threatening gaps in their relationship are
discernible, and here Anna Karenina danced by Edina
Pličanić, distant in time but close to elective affinities,
at times in the gestures of arms and hands, in the bent
neck and shaking body, seems to appeal to Fokine’s choreography of The Dying Swan for Anna Pavlova, as if the
wings of the tragic bird flutter in her dance of a woman
in love. And at the very beginning of this scene Vronsky
carries her in his arms, draped in a cloth which they
subsequently hang together on the wall. On the cloth we
can recognize Adam and Eve banished from Eden. Anna
Arkadyevna mimics the gestures of Eve’s hands crossed
over her chest and the banishment is still a possible topic
of jokes and pleasures of the adulterous couple. Towards
the end of the scene Vronsky will hang the cloth on her
neck, and she will take it off and embrace him with the
cloth like with a sash. Their love is thus transported in
a way to escapism of souvenirs from the shops of the
world museums and galleries, replicas of master works
of arts printed everywhere (on notebooks, mugs, teashirts, boxes, pencils…). A fruitless attempt to maintain
the original feeling with the copy of the work, the copy
of love, something that only reminds us that we once
saw or lived the original. During the Italian idyll both
are already somewhere else, she longs for her son and
he for a military career.
Unquestionable, undeferrable is the end that each
of the spectators undoubtedly knows either from the
novel or from its numerous film adaptations – suicide
under the train wheels. But no. In the same way as Edina
Pličanić at the beginning of the performance climbs on
the stage through the audience Leo Mujić and Valentina
Turcu will at the very end also stress the context of
theatrical mechanism. In other words, in the final scene
there are no screeching sounds of the wheels, clouds
of smoke and deadly strong train headlights, there is
no allusion to the scenery of a railway station. All the
characters from the performance, except Vronsky who
left to the deep darkness of the back scene, are lined up
in the background, one by the other. They are sitting
on the chairs and looking towards the audience, and in
the middle of the stage a part of the lighting equipment
is lowered – a movable bridge with a row of big spotlights. One of them falls directly on Anna Arkadyevna
and when the spotlight nearly touches her head she
drops down below its blinding construction. And she
slowly lies on the floor. She gives in to the merciless
lighting fixture “that flared up more brightly than ever
before, lighted up for her all that had been in darkness”
and remains recumbent. Delivered to the unbearable,
destructive brightness. And the curtain falls from both
sides of the stage and this is the end of the performance.
Heroine’s death is highly stylised, expressly theatrical,
brilliantly metaphorical. As though a great beam of light
of the frightfully metallic, heavy theatrical spotlight disperses irretrievably the bodily reverie, as though with
the fragile dance gestures of Edina Pličanić invoked Anna
Pavlova incorporates some tragic, contemporary dying
swan in the dancing corporeality of Anna Arkadyevna
Karenina.
Movements 23 | 24 _ 235
interview: Edina Pličanić
interview: Edina Pličanić < Anna Karenina, Photo: Ines and Saša Novković >
KATJA ŠIMUNIĆ
Like an Ordinary
Passer-By
in the Street and
Actually a Swan
An interview with
Edina Pličanić
E
dina Pličanić was born in Zagreb, where she finished secondary school and School for Classical
Ballet in the class of Silva Muradori. She has been
member of the Ballet of the Croatian National Theatre in
Zagreb from 1994, and she became the principal dancer
in 2003 and national principal dancer in 2014. She is a
three-time recipient of the Ana Roje Award – in 2001
for the roles in ballets Swan Lake, Coppélia, Who Turned
Out the Light, Four Seasons and for the roles in operas
Khovanschina and Aida, in 2010 for the role of Marguerite
Gautier in the ballet The Lady of the Camellias and in 2011
for the role of Aurora in the ballet Sleeping Beauty and for
the total artistic achievement in the Ballet of the Croatian
National Theatre in Zagreb. She is a two-time recipient of
the Croatian theatre award: for exceptional achievement
of a young artist up to 28 years in the ballet category – in
the theatrical season 2002/2003 for the role of Juliet in
the ballet Romeo and Juliet and in the season 2004/2005
for the role of Odette/Odile in the ballet Swan Lake. She
is also the recipient of the Croatian theatre award for
the best female ballet role in the season 2006/2007 for
Aurora in Sleeping Beauty, the Medal of the City of Zagreb
for artistic achievement in 2008, Audience award of the
Teatar.hr web portal for the best performer of the year
and the Tito Strozzi award for the role of Anna Karenina
in the ballet of the same name choreographed by Leo
Mujić in 2014.
¬ At the beginning of the year 2016, in your home
theatre you are expecting the cooperation with the
French choreographer Patrice Bart who will stage
the ballet Romeo and Juliet to the music of Sergei
Movements 23 | 24 _ 237
Prokofiev. The casting has not yet been made public,
but we remember that your first première role was
precisely Juliet in 2002, to Prokofiev’s music score
and choreographed by Dinko Bogdanić.1
Yes, that was in 2002, I even remember the date – 7th
December, a beautiful time for me, a dream made true
for a young, young ballerina that I was then, ready to
embark on my adventure. That was my first real debut
because I had an opportunity to dance the leading role at
the opening night. That is why I consider Juliet to be the
beginning of my career although I have been dancing ballet from 1994 and before the role of Juliet I have danced
many other roles. I begun in the last row of the ensemble,
from small solo parts, over bigger ones and then some
big roles happened, but Juliet was a true première role
and – a beautiful dream. It was marvellous to work with
Dinko Bogdanić because he adjusted the choreography to
me and in a way he allowed me to create on my own, and
I prefer that today - when a personal creation happens,
when the choreographer listens to you and choreographs
from you. Romeo was danced by a wonderful Slovene
dancer Jaš Otrin as a guest. It was a ballet en pointe of
neo-classical expression and Bogdanić adapted the steps
to us, he choreographed what most suited us. Otrin was
very tall and strong partner in whose arms I really looked
fragile and innocent, and gentle, and our duets were full
of big, beautiful lifts and really choreographed to suit us.
¬ Ten years later you are again dancing Juliet, this
time in the choreography of Svebor Sečak, who dealt
with this ballet on a theoretical level in his Master’s
thesis at the New England University in Australia.
Sečak staged the ballet Romeo and Juliet on the occasion of the fortieth anniversary of the Bermuda Civic
1
Ballet dancer and choreographer Dinko Bogdanić, current director
of the Ballet of the Croatian National Theatre in Split, started taking
ballet lessons at the age of seven, and continued with Sonja Kastl and
Frane Jelinčić in Zagreb. He barely turned 18 when he became member of the Ballet of the Croatian National Theatre of Zagreb, where he
soon became the principal dancer. From 1971 to 1975 he continued his
studies at the Pittsburgh Ballet Theatre and was promoted to the principal dancer. In 1978 he left for Munich and became the principal dancer
at the Bavarian State Opera and Ballet. From 1983 to 1986 he was
engaged as the principal dancer at the Hamburg Ballet. In September
1986 he was engaged at the Gärtnerplatztheater in Munich and from
1991 to 1997 he lectured at the Munich International Ballet School.
From 1998 to 2002 he was the ballet master of the Berlin State Opera
Ballet. From 2002 to 2005 he was director of the Ballet of the Croatian
National Theatre in Zagreb and for that ensemble he created several
choreographies: Minkus’ ballets La Bayadère and Don Quixote, Adam’s
Giselle, Tchaikovsky’s Swan Lake, Prokofiev’s Romeo and Juliet and
Ravel’s La Valse and Pavane pour une infante défunte. He also staged A
Streetcar Named Desire to Mladen Tarbuk’s original music score.
238 _ Kretanja 23 | 24
Ballet. He also deliberately entrusted me with the role of
Juliet because he knew that was my role that remained
somewhere deeply embedded in me and I was very happy
to dance that role after ten years with detachment. And
naturally, I very easily plucked out this innocent, playful
girl who remained in me and who will most probably
remain in me during my whole life. Because for me … it
happens to me that … as soon as I hear the first measures
of Prokofiev’s music that feeling comes back again. I must
stress that I consider the première in 2002 to be one of
the most special things I have experienced. That music
and that story, even today I think that this is one of the
most beautiful ballets. Because of that I am happy that
we shall again stage Romeo and Juliet, that such a great
choreographer as Patrice Bart will work with us, a ballet
artist who trained many excellent dancers of French, German and Italian dance scene. I believe that he will provide
the additional ballet patina and give some new inputs.
¬ What is your first memory of dance?
I think it was a long time ago, already in the kindergarten, while playing we, the girls, had skirts and then
we would turn round. I remember how we told each
other. “Let’s play roses!” And a rose … a rose was a dance,
when we turned round and round, and the skirts blew
up and created a rose. And so we were roses. This was
my first memory of dance, or … or perhaps mum’s and
dad’s New Year eve’s dance…
¬ How did you happen to enrol into a ballet school?
Rhythmics was one of extracurricular activities in
the first grade of the Primary School Pantovčak. Edita Cebalo gave rhythmics classes at that time, and she
knew, because she also went to classical ballet school
in her time, what kind of a body you need to have for
it. She noticed my physical predispositions, that I have
a supple body for dancing and she advised my mother
that I should try, if I would be interested, to enrol into
a ballet school. So, I was lucky to be recognised by my
pedagogue and steered towards ballet school very early.
And it is very important that somebody recognizes you
and directs you early. Mum told me then: “You know,
Edita thinks that you should enrol into a ballet school,
that you are talented for ballet.” And I said:”OK, right.”
And that was it; I have never had second thoughts since.
Consequently, somebody told me very early that I would
be a good ballerina and mum took me to see Swan Lake
where the White swan and the Black swan were danced
by Vesna Butorac at that time. I was watching in the
darkness and realised: yes, that will be me, that will be
my profession. And so it was.
interview: Edina Pličanić ¬ You went to eight-year School for Classical Ballet
in Zagreb. Who were the pedagogues that marked
your education and your advancement in dance after
the ballet school?
I must say that my school years were most marked by
my last teacher Silva Muradori. She was my pedagogue
towards the end of my education and she left the final
mark. She was a fantastic pedagogue; she strengthened
me and gave me the final encouragement one needs to
become a stronger dancer and to be able to face the professional ballet world. And my main, my life pedagogue
was Iraida Lukašova, a long-time ballet master in the
Croatian National Theatre in Zagreb. She is ballet master
from Kiev who came to our theatre over twenty years ago
and she noticed me very early… When I was a little girl
in the ensemble, she always watched me. At times she
would stop me in the theatre hallway and ask me about
my zodiac sign, then she would ask me what do I think
about dance, do I intend to pursue dancing seriously, and
one evening she invited me to a rehearsal, after the one
she did for Almira Osmanović and Irena Pasarić. She told
me to wait till they finish rehearsing and to come to the
studio; she devoted her free time to me because she saw
that I was a good material. She taught me some basics
that I later needed for classical variations: let us practice
diagonals now, let’s practice manège … She coached me
the basic elements of ballet technique to prepare me
for some future solo. A pedagogue is most important. A
good pedagogue who first spots you, and then wishes
and wants to pour his/her knowledge into you, that is
most important. So, I consider Iraida Lukašova to be my
ballet mum.
¬ Who else would you single out as having a crucial
influence to your career?
One of the first choreographers who gave me an
opportunity when I was a young ballerina in the ensemble was our doyen, a great artist Milko Šparemblek.2 He
2
Milko Šparemblek is a ballet dancer, pedagogue, choreographer,
director and dramaturgue. He was born in 1928. He abandoned the
study of literature and started his ballet education with Ana Roje and
Oskar Harmoš in Zagreb and in 1947 he started working in the Croatian National Theatre as a ballet dancer. From 1953 he perfected his
technique in Paris, working with Olga Preobrajenska and Serge Peretti,
and he became the dancer in the companies of Janine Charrat, Milorad
Mišković and Maurice Béjart. From 1955 he created his first choreographies: Quatuor (to the music of Rafaello de Banfield in 1957), Man
in Front of a Mirror (to the music of Milko Kelemen in 1959), Lovers of
Teruel (to the music of Mikis Theodorakis, shot for film as well, directed by Raymond Rouleau in 1961) and others. In Maurice Béjart’s Ballet
of the 20 th Century he was engaged as a ballet master, he worked as
a choreographer in different ballet companies, made television films
(Seven Deadly Sins to the music of Kurt Weil and Bertolt Brecht’s
cast me in a solo role in Triumph of Aphrodite3 and that
was when everybody really saw me for the first time and
said: Ah, she can do something! And after that I danced in
nearly all Šparemblek’s ballets. It is interesting that in his
first version of the ballet Johannes Faust Passion4 I danced
a girl in the Happy couple and that role was created for
me; later on I danced Margaret and now, after fifteen years
Lilith that I had previously learnt, as a young ballerina,
from Almira Osmanović and Mateja Pučko. I would also
like to single out Dinko Bogdanić who noticed me at the
time when I was ready to take off and he sensed the right
moment when he could entrust me with the entire burden
of the leading role. He said: “You are ready kid!” During
a very brief time I danced a serious classical repertory
of leading roles. After that another great pedagogue left
his mark on my technique and ballet knowledge – Derek
Deane.5 He was the permanent choreographer in our
ensemble from 2006 to 2012, a brilliant, brilliant pedagogue. I was really lucky that he came to us and first
he staged Sleeping Beauty, and I was cast as Aurora. He
devoted a lot of time to me and we literally spent hours
and hours in the studio. He is fantastic to work with
because first of all he is really an excellent pedagogue to
libretto, Expectation to the music of Arnold Schönberg, Phaedra to the
music of Georges Auric, The Miraculous Mandarin to the music of Béla
Bartók etc.). He was the manager of the Ballet of the Metropolitan
Opera in New York in 1971, of the Ballet Gulbenkian in Lisbon (19701975), Lyon Ballet (1977-1980) and the Ballet of the Croatian National
Theatre in Zagreb (1992-1994). For Croatian Radiotelevision he directed and choreographed Mathilde (to the music of Richard Wagner),
Chopeniade (to the music of Frédéric Chopin), Gesture for Tin (to
the texts of Tin Ujević and music of Igor Savin), Songs and Dances of
Death (to the music of Modest Petrovich Mussorgsky). In the Ballet of
the Croatian National Theatre in Zagreb he choreographed Opus 43
(to the music of Ludwig van Beethoven in 1975), Triumph of Aphrodite
(to the music of Carl Orff in 1975), Symphony of Psalms (to the music
of Igor Stravinsky in 1976), Songs of Love and Death (to the music of
Gustav Mahler in 1981), Carmina Krležiana (to the music of Prano
Parać in 1987), Amadeus Monumentum (to the music of Wolfgang
Amadeus Mozart in 1990), Johannes Faust Passion (to the music of Johann Sebastian Bach, unknown mediaeval authors and Neven Frangeš
in 2001 and 2015).
3
Milko Šparemblek staged Triumph of Aphrodite in the Croatian
National Theatre in Zagreb in 1975; Edina Pličanić danced in the revived version of the same ballet in 1993.
4
Johannes Faust Passion that Milko Šparemblek created in 2015
in the Croatian National Theatre in Zagreb is a changed and supplemented version of the same ballet that he staged in the same theatre in
2001.
5
British ballet dancer, choreographer and pedagogue Derek Deane
cooperated with the Ballet of the Croatian National Theatre in Zagreb
staging Sleeping Beauty (2006), Swan Lake (2007), Cinderella (2007),
Nutcracker (2011) to the music of Pyotr Ilyich Tchaikovsky, The Lady of
the Camellias (2008) to the music of Carl Davis and Paquita (2011) to
the music of Ludwig Minkus, Richard Drigo, Léo Delibes, Yuli Gerber,
Alexei Papkov, Nikolai Tcherepnin.
Movements 23 | 24 _ 239
help improve the classical technique. He worked with me,
but I also observed while he worked with my partners and
realised how the work with Derek Deane is useful and
valuable. And the role of Aurora in his choreography is
to me one of the most demanding classical roles. Because
this is crystal pure classical technique, which means that
you cannot bring in an exaggerated personality or this
or that interpretation. You know where you stand: it is
the fifth position; it is passé, clear hand positions, the
most classical possible, elongated. And the whole body
is leaning a bit forward. In the first act Aurora dances the
adagio with four princes, then follows a long and difficult
variation, four pirouettes from the fourth, then a long
double manège, first with piqués and the second with
jetés en tournant, and when this ends the coda follows
very quickly. There is lot of pas de chat, those with both
knees up… very exacting, yes. When in the first act in the
variation Aurora has four pirouettes in a diagonal from the
forth position, for instance, I watched Aurélie Dupont, the
star of the Paris Opera and she performed pirouettes in a
row so that on the first she made one or two, on second
two, on third three and finally four pirouettes. This role
is composed of bravuras and enables a ballerina to play
with her technique. Like in the attitude effacée where she
gives her hand four times, once to each of the princes and
keeps her balance. Accordingly, she is in a tutu during all
the three acts, and this is an emphatically classical role
that positioned me as a classical dancer.
¬ You first danced Odette/Odile to the music of Pyotr Ilyich Tchaikovsky in the choreography of Dinko
Bogdanić in 2003.
That’s right. And that was a dream come true. Because
as much as Juliet was a take off, so the Swan was for
me – a birth, a birth of a ballerina and of me as a prima ballerina. Bogdanić announced: “Next season you
are going to dance the Swan, as a première.” I prepared
for six months. The première was in December and we
started to work on the Swan Lake in May and June, at
the end of the previous season. I rehearsed variations
of Black swan and White swan with Iraida Lukašova. I
had a whole summer in front of me and I carried a video
recorder on holiday, we still had video recorders then,
and I watched the VHS tapes of Natalia Makarova in
Swan Lake. And then the season started and the première
came and my partner was again Jaš Otrin, as in Romeo
and Juliet. He danced the Prince, and again he was a
good choice because with his build and height I looked
fantastically fragile. Proportions are very important in
ballet. I really devoted myself to that Swan Lake and I
had a wonderful time… At that time I even kept a diary
240 _ Kretanja 23 | 24
because I knew that was a special period – a dream come
true. In my diary I noted corrections, mine and those of
Iraida Lukašova, and I remember an entry where I saw her
squinting and watching me, trying to create some kind of
a sfumato picture to be able to make more corrections.
She was incredibly wise, she told me wonderful things,
and I have beautiful entries from that time.
¬ What do you think about the film Black Swan
(2010) directed by Darren Aronofsky?
I love that film. I am among the group of people
who were delighted with that film. I understand what
some people do not like about it; the over-accentuated
exaggeration that a dancer must do anything possible for
the role, the fact that she is exposed to all kinds of things
bothers them… But I liked the psychological aspects of
the film, because Nina is so obsessed with the creation of
the role that I remembered myself. When you decide to
dedicate yourself to the roles of Odette and Odile, during
that period you are White swan, you are that Black swan.
I was surprised how deeply the director entered into the
issues of Swan Lake. In the film he exclusively uses the
music by Tchaikovsky and I like very much the way in
which he applied it. If the film is not watched lightly, I
think that it is brilliant. And I love the end when Nina
stabbed herself, this is a very good metaphor, it means
that you need to annul yourself completely, kill yourself
to bring to the surface, to enable the real swan to fly out.
You must defeat yourself completely so that this bird
could fly out, away from you. And to me this is brilliant!
And yes, after all these Swan Lakes I know that no matter
how crushed you feel your soul kind of soars up there
somewhere. And I will repeat, I was surprised how the
director cut to the core, and we know that he had not
experienced that himself, I was surprised how deeply he
embraced the topic. That obsession with the role. For
instance, when I prepared for Swan Lake I was completely
immersed in it. With a few of my close friends I went
into the street and photographed myself as a Black swan,
because this topic interests me. When I prepare a role, I
am so deeply in it that in the street I may seem like an
ordinary passer-by, but in my head, I am that role. That
is why it was interesting for me to go into the street in
the costume like an ordinary passer-by, and actually I am
the Swan. When you see me in the street, I am seemingly
an ordinary passer-by, but in my head I am the Swan or
Juliet or Giselle. And that part is formidably exciting to
me. So that film … the film is excellent.
¬ I saw the performance of revived Giselle in the
choreography of Iraida Lukašova (according to Jean
interview: Edina Pličanić Corelli and Jules Perrot, edited by Marius Petipa)
on 21 st January 2014. The dancers t hat evening
were: Giselle - Ekaterina Borchenko, guest from the
Mikhailovsky Theatre of St. Petersburg and count
Albrecht – Friedemann Vogel, leading ballet dancer of
the Stuttgart Ballet. In the interval after the first act,
in which Giselle dies of dance and love, I spotted you
in the audience drying your tears. This seemed doubly
fascinating to me: after so many performances of
Giselle you had seen you were still so deeply touched
by this ballet and moreover you would dance Giselle
on one of the following evenings and one would
expect that you would watch the performance with
some kind of a professional distance.
Giselle is a wonderful role where dancer also dies, and
I somehow love dramatic roles and that evening theatrical
magic happened. Besides, when I am watching ballet, it
is like when I am dancing, I let go truly and completely.
I am terribly emotional, that evening the ballerina was
incredibly dramatic and sincere, I felt that and was really
taken in. I love expressive ballerinas and I love emotional
ballerinas. And I remember that it has been like that from
the beginning when I started going to ballet school…
There was a serial on Croatian television about ballet
hosted by Natalia Makarova where she talked about the
entire ballet profession. Natalia Makarova delighted me
from the early age, she is a pure classicist, but at the same
time an expressive and emotional ballerina. I also adore
Sylvie Guillem; she is ultima for me, an absolute ballerina,
brilliant in classical works, brilliant in the freedom of
contemporary ballet. She has this strength. When I watch
her – it makes sense. Whatever she does.
¬ What is your relationship towards the audience?
I experience the audience as one of the most important components of the theatre, as a participant in the
performance. There is no performance without an audience. Sometimes it is just a crowd in the darkness, but it
is a live organism, breathing from the darkness, expecting… Or a very big eye or a pulse that absorbs the events
on the stage. For what are we without an audience? We
transfer all these emotions for the audience.
¬ How do you comment the opinions that the classical ballet technique is violent, that it tortures the
body?
This is definitely a torture for the body. (laughter) But
that is how it is. I agreed to that because I could, I could
cope with the demands of ballet. I had the desire and
physical predispositions to adopt that skill. I regard the
Movements 23 | 24 _ 241
ballet as a skill that has its rules, a system of dancing.
My answer to the question why I am dancing ballet is –
because I can. And it is a pleasure to win over physical
principles, or rather to be in harmony with them.
¬ What is the difference between dancing en pointe
and in a soft slipper?
When you dance en pointe you are often on half-toes
and on a full foot as in soft slippers, only the sensitive
part of the foot is smaller since the foot is quite squeezed.
In class I like to combine work in soft slippers and en
pointe. In soft slippers because I want to feel the metatarsal bones… Because to raise en pointe you need to go
through all the stages you can go through in a soft slipper,
the only difference being that you cannot dance on your
toe tips. En pointe you get the feeling of an elongated
body, the part from the hips to the ribs is extended and
in a soft slipper you feel the push on the floor and you
need to, so to say, pull up from the floor. But one links
to the other and the two complement each other.
¬ Have you danced barefoot?
Oh, yes… For instance in Šparemblek’s The Miraculous Mandarin. The role of the Girl is danced en pointe
from the beginning of the performance, and when at the
end she experiences a catharsis she takes of her wig, her
pointe shoes and remains barefoot. She returns to herself.
And she dances, of course. But I love to walk barefoot
in everyday life too. If I am in outdoors, on a lawn, on a
stone, rocks, I take off my shoes without fail, I love that
direct contact, that “earthing”.
¬ How do you experience the process of aging?
The body itself gives all the answers. But at first you
do not want to accept that it is changing. Some things
are improving, others are getting worse. Strength and
muscular activity decline, metabolism is slower, and then
again, the experience gives you the benefit to have a big
archive of movements inside you and better control and
concentration. And that is wonderful! Each part of the
career has its advantages. As a young dancer you govern
the strength and you are driven by wish, and as a mature
dancer you are more thoughtful and perhaps even enjoy
yourself more.
¬ You were gravely injured in 2008, during one of
the dress rehearsals for the ballet The Lady of the
Camellias.
Yes… Derek Deane created the role of Marguerite
Gautier for Milka Hribar and I rehearsed the role after
her but without a partner. And then there was a moment
242 _ Kretanja 23 | 24
when Milka was exhausted by the work process and dress
rehearsals so they suggested that I do one of the following rehearsals. And I, probably out of egoistic motives,
because before that I had not been noticed, nobody was
concerned with my role, they paid no attention to me, I
told myself: I will show them. And I ventured in a stage
rehearsal with partner prima vista. And that went well
and the two weeks of every-day rehearsals should have
followed so that I could completely master the role as
understudy. But then there was another dress rehearsal
with the orchestra when they realized that Milka was
again too tired and I danced that rehearsal although I
was not physically ready for it, nor had I passed through
the whole process of role preparation. During one jump,
when I had to fly into partner’s arms, a knee rotation happened and my anterior cruciate ligaments were torn. An
operation followed, then a convalescent period, gaining
strength, I was away from the stage for a year. But I came
back in 2009, first in The Nutcracker, and at the end of
the season in The Lady of the Camellias. The injury taught
me that I was not unbreakable, that my body has its weak
points that I need to be careful… But you forget about
this very soon and continue as before. But every now and
then my knee reminds me that I need to attend to it, so
that I also go to the gym for additional strengthening of
muscles. Because this left knee is on a supporting leg, for
instance you dance the whole second act of Swan Lake on
left leg… I do not know how many fouettés were done on
that leg through my career… I must find a way to dance
on my right leg more. (laughter)
¬ In addition to emblematic classical ballet works
you also danced to choreographies of Nacho Duato,
Edward Clug, Pascal Touzeau, Hugo Viera. And in 2011
you danced in the choreography Five Tangos by Hans
van Manen.
I enjoyed it. Especially the second tango when I am
on the stage with eight partners and I have to dominate.
In that scene I actually embody death, one that takes all,
and that role was close to me because of the role of the
Lady in Red choreographed by Milko Šparemblek from
his ballet Songs of Love and Death. Even the colours corresponded somehow. The Lady in red is in a red dress, of
course, and in the tango we had red and black costumes,
and I had the same coiffure in both choreographies, so
these roles were close to one another. Hans van Manen
uses fists as one whole, differently to classical ballet
where the third finger and thumb are a bit inward, in
the same way as Šparemblek. By the way, this choreography was set up according to a Croatian ballerina with
international career – Sonja Marchiolli, and at the time
interview: Edina Pličanić when we prepared Five Tangos she led us the classes.
The choreography was transmitted by choreographer’s
assistant Mea Venema and Hans van Manen came to two
rehearsals before the opening night and his corrections
stroke the core of the move. I shall never forget what he
told us about rond de jambe at a level of ninety degrees,
because today dancers do the rond at hundred and twenty
and even at hundred and eighty. Van Manen said that he
preferred rond de jambe at a bit more than ninety degrees
because then he can see it, and when it is too high he
cannot see what is going on. The leg trajectory is much
wider at a level of ninety degrees. From then on I always
do the adagio thinking about his words. Five Tangos is
the only Van Manen’s choreography I danced to, I would
have loved to have danced other ones.
¬ With which choreographer would you like to
work?
Mats Ek. Definitely - Mats Ek. His Sleeping Beauty is
the best of all the versions I have ever seen. That softness
of bodies of his dancers, organic mechanic of moves - for
me that is most beautiful in his choreographies.
¬ How have you prepared for the title role in the
ballet Anna Karenina choreographed6 by Leo Mujić?
Anna Karenina… Yes, I could say that is one of my
favourite roles. Working on it was marvellous because
I have known the choreographer7 for a long time and
he knew my potential. The dramaturgue8 was fantastically clear, she explained what she wanted very well
and precisely, how the scenes will follow, so that was
defined, and I devoted myself to the role by reading the
book in parallel to rehearsals. I found the novel, Tolstoy’
Anna Karenina, dusted the two volumes9 that sat on the
shelves from my mother’s youth, set about to read it and
– enjoyed it. And I brought back my earliest memories
when I was a little girl. My mum loved the film Anna
Karenina with Greta Garbo. That was one of the first
films I had seen. And Greta Garbo is still today an idol for
me. I must confess that in working on the role of Anna
Karenina I often had that grace of hers on my mind. And
how she acted the role with her eyes. Naturally, I have
seen other film versions including the latest one10 , which
6
See note 3 on page 231.
7
Leo Mujić, see note 6 on page 233.
8
Valentina Turcu, see note 5 on page 232.
9
Lav Nikolajevič Tolstoj, Ana Karenjina, volume one and two,
translated by Krunoslav Pranjić, Zagreb: NZMH, 1976.
10 Film Anna Karenina (2012) directed by Joe Wright, with Keira
Knightley in the title role, dance scenes choreographed by Sidi Larbi
Cherkaoui.
is very modern, fast, with a different interpretation of
Anna, but to me Greta and the book remained dominant.
And although our ballet is en pointe, it absolutely borders
with contemporary ballet in its freedom, freedom of interpretation and Leo Mujić is definitely a choreographer of
contemporary ballet. Although he uses classical pointe he
is very contemporary artist. And again the creation was
the most beautiful of all… And as much as I was inspired
by Greta Garbo and the novel, I was also inspired by my
partners, exceptional Karenin and Vronsky. They were
danced by incredibly good Portuguese dancer Guilherme
Gameiro Alves and a beautiful Hungarian dancer Tamás
Darai. The three of us connected and rounded up our
version of Anna Karenina.
¬ After the performance of Anna Karenina on 19th
November 2014 you were promoted to national principal dancer and in your address to the audience that
night you said that it had been your pleasure to die
for them that evening as well. Namely, at the end
of the performance you seem to disappear under a
dropping spotlight.
The final scene is an unexpected and dramatically
excellent choice. I love that, I love to melt under that
light; I think that is a fantastic metaphor. It gives me a
true artistic pleasure.
English translation: Jasenka Zajec
Katja Šimunić, after having finished the School for Ballet and
Rhythmics / Department of Rhythmics and Dance, graduated
in dramaturgy at the Academy of Dramatic Arts in Zagreb and
obtained a master’s degree in dance theory from the University Paris 8 in France. Dance practitioner (choreographer and
director) and theoretician (independent researcher, editor in
Kretanja/Movements, Croatian dance magazine, author and
radio anchor in the program At the End of the Week, Third
Channel of the Croatian Radio, contributor of the web portal
Plesnascena.hr etc.) she analyzes dance transdisciplinary,
positioning it to other arts, media and discourses.
Movements 23 | 24 _ 243

aka defi jana princessa video

Transcription

Similar documents

CENIK MESECNIH KART ZUMBA in BOKWA VELENJE - M

Renata Ardaševová Martina Matušínská - klavir/piano

nočna vadba night practice

5. letní soustředění - Fantasy Dance Studio

Issue 16 -

Školski list osnovne škole Manuš Broj 5 { Godina 2012. ⁄ 2013

1. PDF dokument

Mart 2013 - Magazine For You

Februar 2014 - Magazine For You

Orchestra magazin broj 29-31 - PDF

LiVeS Journal 2

1. PDF dokument

1. PDF dokument

CNA-AnnualReport2015

l l l l l l l l - Mreža sodobnega plesa

showtime - EST - English student theatre

www.kulturauzagrebu.hr

Orchestra magazin broj 17/18 - PDF

lz S1ngapura s ljubavlju From Singapore with Love

Orchestra magazin broj 56/58 - PDF