![\"\"](\"http:\/\/www.musicalamerica.com\/mablogs\/wp-content\/uploads\/2011\/01\/margie-gillis-199x300.jpg\")
<\/a> Gillis in “Chalice.” Photo:\u00a0Virginia Rollison<\/p>\nBarruch\u2019s second offering of the evening\u2014to Bach\u2019s aria \u201cErbarme Dich\u201d from “St Matthew Passion<\/span>, BWV 244″\u2014possessed a jewel-like focus. Called \u201cChalice,\u201d the solo physicalizes the lyrics of Bach\u2019s aria, regarding betrayal and its subsequent feelings of guilt. In a blood-red dress, veteran performer Margie Gillis reaches and recoils from an alcohol-filled chalice. Her unbound, hip-length hair weeps over the drink\u2014her undoing. Like Martha Graham\u2019s solo \u201cLamentation\u201d (1930), \u201cChalice\u201d never feels saccharin. Like a painting, it captures a moment in time. It\u2019s consistently intense. But the third piece by Barruch failed to harness the previous solos\u2019 succinctness. In the world premiere of \u201cWane,\u201d narrative elements surfaced and dissolved; seven dancers came and went in lush, spiraling phrases; black cargo pants and aggressive partnering hinted at a warring world.<\/span><\/p>\n **<\/span><\/p>\n Warring (or wrestling) was the featured movement motif in Cie. Philippe Saire\u2019s \u201cLonesome Cowboy,\u201d which held its U.S. premiere at the Joyce Theater (Jan 6-9). In the Swiss-Algerian choreographer\u2019s universe, comprised of five men in a gravel pit, aggression became the departure point for displaying how the male species becomes defined by their life\u2019s station (whether it\u2019s in the military, on Wall Street, or on a stoop guzzling beer in a kilt sans <\/em>underwear).<\/p>\n This narrow self-definition renders these guys\u2014surprise, surprise\u2014lost, dazed, and confused. At the end of the 80-minute production to Christopher Bollondi\u2019s alternatively heavy hitting and soporific sound score, the five performers took a bow like they didn\u2019t know what hit them.<\/p>\n Their antics during the performance reminded me of the blockbuster film \u201cBill and Ted\u2019s Excellent Adventure\u201d (1989), where two time-traveling teenagers survive Napoleon and Genghis Khan\u2019s violence because <\/em>they are ignorant, daring dudes. In \u201cLonesome Cowboy,\u201d the men nail each other\u2019s faces to the floor with their heels, suck face, and drag each other around to no lasting positive or negative effect. They are pawns in Saire\u2019s clich\u00e9d psychodrama, divorced from any movement material that would identify them as individuals.<\/p>\n **<\/p>\n \u201cA Slow Week in the Dance Studio with Strangers\u201d would be my suggestion as the working title for Wally Cardona\u2019s latest dance, presented January 8 at the Baryshnikov Arts Center. Titled \u201cIntervention #4: Robert Sember,\u201d the hour-long piece was \u201cSlow\u201d because the performers (Cardona, Sember, and Francis A. Stansky) moved about as I do in my apartment: They sat, stood, and lied prone. The work involved a \u201cWeek\u201d because on Monday, January 3, the sound artist and social activist Robert Sember met the choreographer Wally Cardona; by Saturday they had to create something for the ever-critical New York crowd.\u00a0Cardona and Sember\u2019s experience occurred in a \u201cDance Studio,\u201d in this case room 6A of the BAC. And, yes, the artists were initially \u201cStrangers\u201d to each other. Like my working title, the overall piece felt strung together.<\/p>\n If creating a dance for consumption in five days sounds like a doleful plan, you’re correct.\u00a0Nonetheless, my hopes for \u201cIntervention\u201d ran high for four reasons: One, in tough economic times it\u2019s best to be honest with your audiences. If there is only enough money to make a work in a week, why not advertise it as just that? Two, Cardona\u2019s \u201cIntervention\u201d concept\u2014an artist intervenes and catapults him in new directions\u2014is an intriguing idea. Three,\u00a0Cardona is on the fourth of seven “Intervention” series; he may be getting the hang of this format. Four,\u00a0the couple seated to my left really liked \u201cIntervention #3: Karina Lyons,\u201d which premiered in December at the Joyce Soho. In that work, the intervener was a sommelier and wine consultant who lubricated the audience with wine while Cardona, a fascinatingly quirky mover, danced.<\/p>\n Sound artist Sember, however, is no Merlot wine. He is tall and serious; he\u2019s not particularly nimble. Did he create a pall over Cardona\u2019s creativity? Only Cardona can say.<\/p>\n Cardona is prone to exploring multiple layers of meaning. With Sember at his side, Cardona created a concept that read better on paper than on stage.\u00a0At the 40-minute mark, I believe I got its gist: How do three people interpret the same verbal directions?<\/p>\n “Intervention #4” began with Cardona, standing stock still in square space, flanked by the audience seated around him. Cardona walked purposefully, closed his eyes, and covered his ears. A timer rang; he left. Then Sember entered. He accomplished similar movements, but this time a voiceover (via overhead speakers) directed his actions, as though a mild-mannered choreographer was in his head. Later, a duet with Sember and Stansky unfolded where two voices directed their tasks: \u201cturn your head to the left,\u201d \u201csit on your left side.\u201d The work\u2019s climax came when all three men took the same verbal cues from the same voice.\u00a0Each performer interpreted the same words\u2014\u201ctwist,\u201d \u201creach,\u201d \u201cfall\u201d\u2014in different ways.<\/p>\n \u201cIntervention #4\u201d called to mind Roland Barthes\u2019s S\/Z<\/em> (1970). The French semiotician argued that a text has no fixed meaning. There are only interpretations. This is a founding principle of post-modern dance. If it sounds doleful, you are correct.<\/p>\n \u00a0<\/p>\n <\/span><\/p>\n <\/span><\/p>\n <\/p>\n