[Note: In honor of the eighth season of one of my favorite middlebrow reality TV shows, I thought I'd dust off this post from July 2009.}
No one thought it would succeed. Even the executive producer doubted that an “American Idol-style competition for dancers” would work on television. Dance may be, as German musicologist Curt Sachs claimed, the “mother of the arts” but it has always been considered a highbrow form with limited appeal to Americans. Dance may be something we do, but it was not something we want to watch.
Yet despite being aired during the doldrums of television (the summer season) on the most denigrated of formats (reality TV) on a channel known for its lowbrow standards (FOX) and having a cheesy, incorrectly punctuated title, So You Think You Can Dance has managed to do the near impossible: Not only has it exposed a mass audience to dance, but it cultivates appreciation for the beauty and complexity of this neglected artform.
The key was to pull a mulit-year bait-and-switch on the audience. Over the course of each episode, contestants are assigned different partners and dance styles—ranging from the formal (jazz) to the informal (krump)—to test their versatility. During its first few seasons (it’s now in its eighth) viewers tuned in primarily to watch the street-styles such as popping-and-locking and breakdancing. The waltzes and jazz and Broadway routines were something to be endured until the next hip-hop exhibition came on.
But the cadre of talented choreographers—especially Emmy-award winning Mia Michaels—showed that more formal styles were often more memorable and moving. As the audience taste matured, so did the show. Fewer street-skilled “B-boys/girls” and break dancers made it past the auditions, leaving the more formally trained (and generally more talented) semi-professional dancers to fill out the competition.
The result is a television show that consistently blurs the distinction between pop culture and high art. To get a feel for the show, here are five videos of five performances from SYTYCD that use the art form of dance to tell a short story:
Addiction – Kayla Radomski & Kupono Aweau (Song: ‘Gravity,’ Sarah Bareilles)
The Hummingbird and the Flower – Jaimie Goodwin & Hotuko ‘Hok’ Konishi (‘The Chairman’s Waltz,’ from Memoirs of a Geisha)
The Bench – Heidi Groskreutz & Travis Wall (‘Calling You,’ Celine Dion)
Wade Robison group routine (‘Ramalama Bang Bangby’ Roisin Murphy)
The Necklace – Jeanine Mason & Jason Glover (Song: ‘If It Kills Me,’ Jason Mraz)
Cancer – Melissa Sandvig & Ade Obayomi (‘This Woman’s Work,’ Maxwell)
June 16th, 2011 | 2:13 pm
The result is a television show that consistently blurs the distinction between pop culture and high art.
I dunno, Joe. I’m a serious dance fan, mostly of ballet but of some modern dance as well, Cunningham especially, and while that doesn’t mean my judgment must be correct, I think my experience counts for something, and I found these hard to watch. I’m also disappointed that no one else has commented so far.
First clip: g-dawful, over-emoted schlock, and that goes for both the gymnastic choreography and her outfit.
Second clip: no relation between music and choreography, and little modulation in energy levels in the fast moments.
Third clip: dragging a woman across the floor and then turning your back on her is brutish, not romantic. And what’s with the wild cheering, as if this is a sports competition?
Fourth clip: I’m not sure what kind of a “story” this is supposed to tell, but at least the costumes were interesting and the posturing amusing rather than painfully serious.
Fourth clip: the most interesting choreographically for my taste. I don’t like it, but I find moments to admire. But like the 1,2, and 3 it’s all in one narrow emotional, Harlequin range between romantic passion and romantic anguish. Over-emoting can’t make up for cliched choreography, and it ruins good choreography.
Fifth piece: Well with an Oprah-esque setup like that, only a hard-hearted misanthrope could knock it, right?
June 18th, 2011 | 12:56 am
Well Ken, and Joe too, here is my comment!
I’m not a truly devoted fan of this show, it irritates hubby so I don’t always watch it, but I must praise it a bit.
I’m not a dance fan, never have been, never read the reviews, etc. I’ve seen some dance in my life, but it never did too much for me.
SYTYCD really showed me what a powerful art form dance can be.
It did it via a routine that I think was called “bleeding heart”, or maybe that was the song title, I’m not sure. It was a fantastic routine, so well done by the dancers and it just made me finally “get” dance in a way I never had before.
This is why I must stick up for this show.
And, like American Idol and also The Amazing Race, this is a show that a family can watch together. These shows are as close to the old variety shows, like Jackie Gleason and Ed Sullivan as we have today.
Are there some racy parts or maybe some strange people on them? Yes, there are. And I wouldn’t say they are appropriate for very young children. But, hey, at least you can watch them with everyone from the 12 year olds to grandma.
Some of the cooking shows are great for that too.
And, I know the sob-story factor can be over done, but it can be uplifting to hear what people struggle with in their lives and see how they strive to achieve.
That is the story of America, it really is what makes this country great.
I read an article years ago, long before the internet, I have no idea where, that bemoaned the loss of middle brow culture. If I remember correctly it cited the authors James Michener and Herman Wouk as examples of that level of craft.
And it has been a great loss. Recently we’ve had very little between total vulgarianism and “deconstructionist” or “transgressive” nonsense that actually makes the Vulgarians look brilliant by comparison.
If reality TV proves to have been the bridge to a restoration of a true “middle brow” culture, we will thank Providence for having sent us Mark Burnett, Simon Cowell, et al.
Links
Blogs
Find Us
Contact