Can you follow dance/drama stuff?

[leehart]

Hi I’m curious to see if this is anyone else’s experience. A few weeks back I was at a service and part of it was a drama, it wasn’t spoken but a dramatic performance, I had not the slightest idea what it was trying to tell me, without words I can’t follow it. Does anyone else experience that?

Also with dance, when watching strictly come dancing (dancing with the stars for the us folks) they keep talking about the story the dance conveys, I am really confused by that for there is no story that I can see, just two folks moving in sync and beat (hopefully!) I can kinda appreciate it for the synchronicity but when it comes to the idea of a story behind it I ain’t got a clue!

Is this something others can relate to? Without words it seems I really struggle to follow what is going on and I would consider myself fairly good at reading body language.

 

[Misery]

There's two answers here.

Firstly, when it comes to dance/art/performance ACTUALLY trying to tell a story:

Honestly I think most people cant actually follow it unless they already happen to know alot about both the specific art/performance form, and story direction in a general sense.

There's a reason why most books/shows/movies/games/whatever are very direct about storytelling.

Often, those that do things like trying to tell stories purely through symbolism or movement are usually considered to be.... how should I put this.... "trying too hard to look sophisticated". Which is putting it nicely. My mom always referred to stuff like that as "artsy-fartsy". Make of that what you will.

I mean, really. If there's a story to tell... just tell the freaking story. Dont make your audience analyze how many times the dancer waved his left arm in order to figure out whether he wants to go to France or not. Or whatever nonsense is supposedly happening.


Second answer:

When it comes to things like Dancing with the Stars and other shows like that.... honestly there is no "story" in the sense that you're thinking. It's one of those things the judges (or whatever they are in a particular show) say to attempt to add a bit more depth to what they're saying (since just holding up a card with a number wouldnt exactly fill the run time, now would it). What actually matters in these shows are technique and execution. There's no retelling of War and Peace in the movements of some guy's legs.

And honestly, when you listen to judges do their thing, if you really listen close and pay attention, you might find that 95% of what they say is just random drivel.

...Seriously, they could make their point so much faster by holding up that blasted card, but that'd be over too fast.

 

[leehart]

There's two answers here.

Firstly, when it comes to dance/art/performance ACTUALLY trying to tell a story:

Honestly I think most people cant actually follow it unless they already happen to know alot about both the specific art/performance form, and story direction in a general sense.

There's a reason why most books/shows/movies/games/whatever are very direct about storytelling.

Often, those that do things like trying to tell stories purely through symbolism or movement are usually considered to be.... how should I put this.... "trying too hard to look sophisticated". Which is putting it nicely. My mom always referred to stuff like that as "artsy-fartsy". Make of that what you will.

I mean, really. If there's a story to tell... just tell the freaking story. Dont make your audience analyze how many times the dancer waved his left arm in order to figure out whether he wants to go to France or not. Or whatever nonsense is supposedly happening.


Second answer:

When it comes to things like Dancing with the Stars and other shows like that.... honestly there is no "story" in the sense that you're thinking. It's one of those things the judges (or whatever they are in a particular show) say to attempt to add a bit more depth to what they're saying (since just holding up a card with a number wouldnt exactly fill the run time, now would it). What actually matters in these shows are technique and execution. There's no retelling of War and Peace in the movements of some guy's legs.

And honestly, when you listen to judges do their thing, if you really listen close and pay attention, you might find that 95% of what they say is just random drivel.

...Seriously, they could make their point so much faster by holding up that blasted card, but that'd be over too fast.

Lol! I love your answer! Encapsulates so much of what I think. My wife seems able to interpret this stuff but I can’t make any sense.

 

[unperson]

I struggled with that stuff for a long time, still do, I only came to some understanding of symbolism and ritual later in life, but you have to have a lexicon/mental dictionary of say colour and movement to interpret it, so it takes a while to pick up the 'jargon'.

 

[Progster]

I can follow the basic plot, but often miss the nuances.

 

[RtWalton]

What you have to understand about less wordy plays and dances like this is that although they may be trying to tell a story, it is not necessarily a concrete story. Using symbols like this creates some ambiguity over the meaning of what is occurring, and in some ways this is actually intentional. The reason you can’t follow what is happening is because there isn’t anything to follow, they want you to fill in the holes of what is occurring on your own. Naturally, this causes many different interpretations of the same story. Part of why people like dances and plays like this is that they create many things to consider, because there is not a clear correct answer. It makes for some interesting conversation after seeing the play because people can share their own numerous interpretations of it, encouraging some further thoughts into it and sometimes even allowing people to gain insights into eachother’s thought processes. There would just not be as much to talk about if there was no ambiguity.