As someone who once raved about William Forsythe’s innovative approach to ballet and fondly admired his groundbreaking choreographic explorations, I felt let down by last week’s performance by his company at Sadler’s Wells.
Things did not start badly, though. The way gestural solutions unfold and develop in a crescendo of movement variables, variants, similes and opposites in N.N.N.N. (2002) is rather engaging. The game of quick interaction between four male dancers moves rapidly from the simplest hand movement to demanding acts of powerful physicality; there are humorous moments and tense ones, as well affectionate references to the neoclassical oeuvre of George Balanchine — whom Forsythe has often referred to as a major source of inspiration. Unfortunately, what starts as an intriguing idea laced with humour, inventiveness and a good dose of unpredictability soon turns into a reiteration of guessable formulae. In the end, if the work manages to elicit applause it is because of the bravura of its interpreters and its merciful brevity — a quality that is increasingly rare in modern-day dance-making.
Like N.N.N.N.,
Comments
Join the debate for just $5 for 3 months
Be part of the conversation with other Spectator readers by getting your first three months for $5.
UNLOCK ACCESS Just $5 for 3 monthsAlready a subscriber? Log in