研
究
評
論
TJIMUR藝術生活節與國際交流演出
TJIMUR Arts Festival-
International Exchange and Performance
張懿文
YI WEN CHANG
YI WEN CHANG
位在南方屏東的蒂摩爾古薪舞集,以發揚排灣族傳統舞蹈,從當代形式出發,在國際交流與當代表演藝術交流上,頗有企圖。在2019 TJIMUR藝術生活節舉辦時,每晚都有有與東印度「Kaishiki Nrityabhasha」奧迪西古典舞的國際交流匯演,在「尋覓傳統中的當代」理念中,從重新理解和發現過去出發,持續發展台灣與印度舞蹈的不同可能。
這幾場國際匯演在蒂摩爾古薪舞小小的排練室進行,現場擠滿了熱情地觀眾,總共由九支舞蹈穿插演出,來自台灣與印度不同的編舞者和舞者,表演了各自分別的創作,與一同共製的合作計畫。從《排灣歌謠》、“Sabhinay”、《排灣族傳統樂舞》到《哎撒撒 ai~sa sa》和“Pausev”等舞作,順序是按照較為傳統的古典舞蹈起始,慢慢轉向創新的當代創作,前面幾首舞可以看見排灣族古典舞蹈的吟唱傳統,在舞者華麗炫目的古典族服和閃亮發光的長串琉璃珠裝飾中,舞者的身體隨著歌唱的呼吸律動,幻化出優美的身型姿態,與奧迪西舞者溫柔婉約的眼神、靈活的「三道彎」舞姿搔首弄姿,恰成一個美麗對比。而《哎撒撒 ai~sa sa》舞蹈中舞者穿著時裝,輕快活潑的姿態,有如悠閒的青春少年少女,散發出舞蹈劇場傳統中,表演元素運用道具與戲劇手法的氛圍,在輕快的法文歌聲中,舞者們時而做出誇張戲劇化的表情、時而拍手鼓鬧、拋接展現不同的動作位移,有著讓人耳目一新之感。而現場除了有實驗性音樂樂器的配合,也有現場人聲的即興陪伴,令人印象深刻的是印度舞者和台灣原民音樂人、或是台灣舞者與印度吟唱者之間的巧妙搭配,讓人讚嘆不同文化背景的藝術創作者,可以一樣透過音樂這世界性的共同語言,一起暢快呼吸、一起和樂樂舞。
演出的最後一支舞碼《XVII》,特別使人眼睛為之一亮,相當具有可塑性,這支舞作從打破印度奧迪西舞敲打數拍的概念開始,召喚觀者重新思考身體、節奏、數拍與動作之間的可能性,印度舞者穿著寬鬆而非傳統的布料,呼喊著節拍 “one, two, three, four…” 舞者也在張嘴數拍之間,同時用手指比出數字,甚至在左右手之間交互比劃「箭頭」與「數字」,彷彿「手語的繞口令」一般,令人目不暇給,挑戰舞者的認知與協調性。也因此讓人聯想到,在蒂摩爾古薪舞集實驗創作的「當代排灣族肢體語彙」之中,很重要的是由身體由吟唱的發聲動作練習出發,讓肢體重心朝下,像從土地上安穩地踩下,再從與地板的反彈之間,運用重心的移動,讓腳踏地與抬起的動作自然產生一股穩重協調且一致的韻律,並運用此種重複的律動,塑造出樸實而規律、近乎後現代主義舞蹈中極簡主義舞蹈的動作氛圍,此種經過蒂摩爾古薪舞集重新詮釋的「排灣族當代身體性」,衝造出對傳統傳承轉化出的新身體語彙。由此觀之,這支舞《XVII》不但創新了排灣族舞蹈的當代身體性,也從另一個「音樂」為主體的角度出發,透過印度奧迪西古典舞中,用身體(手指)打節奏的韻律,轉化彼此共同的音樂性(與音樂相對應於身體的節奏性),如此說來,這支舞的國際性,絕對不只是只有文化差異的層次而已,而是從一個根本的舞蹈藝術問題(節奏的韻律)去串聯兩種不同舞蹈的特質,進而去發展兩種古典舞蹈的當代實驗。
這個表演的實驗,也提出了一些前瞻性的問題意識,例如:印度舞的老師在演出中運用了手鈴樂器等來和舞者溝通,和奧迪西打擊節拍的特殊性,這些音樂舞蹈的符碼在共製創新中是如何被轉化,實際操作的面向為何?如何傳遞印度舞和排灣族舞蹈共有的儀式精神性?在兩種舞蹈中,特別是印度舞有眼部表情跟符號化身體程式,這些傳統舞蹈中的儀式精神性,是否可以透過精簡化、重複等形式來形成當代舞蹈的語彙?另外,排灣族舞蹈的圓圈拉手、經過當代轉化後低沈又能彈跳的踢腿動作,和奧迪西很直線型的三道彎、盤腿、扭曲腰肢等動作,蘊含著很不同的空間使用觀和身體美學,也因此,當融合西方舞蹈的肢體訓練已成為一般台灣舞蹈創新的常態時,讓擁有當代舞蹈訓練的舞者,去學習其他非西方的「世界舞蹈」技術來實驗創作,似乎也是另一種頗有彈性的方向,這也讓人期待更多蒂摩爾古薪舞集的共製串連和分享。
這幾場國際匯演在蒂摩爾古薪舞小小的排練室進行,現場擠滿了熱情地觀眾,總共由九支舞蹈穿插演出,來自台灣與印度不同的編舞者和舞者,表演了各自分別的創作,與一同共製的合作計畫。從《排灣歌謠》、“Sabhinay”、《排灣族傳統樂舞》到《哎撒撒 ai~sa sa》和“Pausev”等舞作,順序是按照較為傳統的古典舞蹈起始,慢慢轉向創新的當代創作,前面幾首舞可以看見排灣族古典舞蹈的吟唱傳統,在舞者華麗炫目的古典族服和閃亮發光的長串琉璃珠裝飾中,舞者的身體隨著歌唱的呼吸律動,幻化出優美的身型姿態,與奧迪西舞者溫柔婉約的眼神、靈活的「三道彎」舞姿搔首弄姿,恰成一個美麗對比。而《哎撒撒 ai~sa sa》舞蹈中舞者穿著時裝,輕快活潑的姿態,有如悠閒的青春少年少女,散發出舞蹈劇場傳統中,表演元素運用道具與戲劇手法的氛圍,在輕快的法文歌聲中,舞者們時而做出誇張戲劇化的表情、時而拍手鼓鬧、拋接展現不同的動作位移,有著讓人耳目一新之感。而現場除了有實驗性音樂樂器的配合,也有現場人聲的即興陪伴,令人印象深刻的是印度舞者和台灣原民音樂人、或是台灣舞者與印度吟唱者之間的巧妙搭配,讓人讚嘆不同文化背景的藝術創作者,可以一樣透過音樂這世界性的共同語言,一起暢快呼吸、一起和樂樂舞。
演出的最後一支舞碼《XVII》,特別使人眼睛為之一亮,相當具有可塑性,這支舞作從打破印度奧迪西舞敲打數拍的概念開始,召喚觀者重新思考身體、節奏、數拍與動作之間的可能性,印度舞者穿著寬鬆而非傳統的布料,呼喊著節拍 “one, two, three, four…” 舞者也在張嘴數拍之間,同時用手指比出數字,甚至在左右手之間交互比劃「箭頭」與「數字」,彷彿「手語的繞口令」一般,令人目不暇給,挑戰舞者的認知與協調性。也因此讓人聯想到,在蒂摩爾古薪舞集實驗創作的「當代排灣族肢體語彙」之中,很重要的是由身體由吟唱的發聲動作練習出發,讓肢體重心朝下,像從土地上安穩地踩下,再從與地板的反彈之間,運用重心的移動,讓腳踏地與抬起的動作自然產生一股穩重協調且一致的韻律,並運用此種重複的律動,塑造出樸實而規律、近乎後現代主義舞蹈中極簡主義舞蹈的動作氛圍,此種經過蒂摩爾古薪舞集重新詮釋的「排灣族當代身體性」,衝造出對傳統傳承轉化出的新身體語彙。由此觀之,這支舞《XVII》不但創新了排灣族舞蹈的當代身體性,也從另一個「音樂」為主體的角度出發,透過印度奧迪西古典舞中,用身體(手指)打節奏的韻律,轉化彼此共同的音樂性(與音樂相對應於身體的節奏性),如此說來,這支舞的國際性,絕對不只是只有文化差異的層次而已,而是從一個根本的舞蹈藝術問題(節奏的韻律)去串聯兩種不同舞蹈的特質,進而去發展兩種古典舞蹈的當代實驗。
這個表演的實驗,也提出了一些前瞻性的問題意識,例如:印度舞的老師在演出中運用了手鈴樂器等來和舞者溝通,和奧迪西打擊節拍的特殊性,這些音樂舞蹈的符碼在共製創新中是如何被轉化,實際操作的面向為何?如何傳遞印度舞和排灣族舞蹈共有的儀式精神性?在兩種舞蹈中,特別是印度舞有眼部表情跟符號化身體程式,這些傳統舞蹈中的儀式精神性,是否可以透過精簡化、重複等形式來形成當代舞蹈的語彙?另外,排灣族舞蹈的圓圈拉手、經過當代轉化後低沈又能彈跳的踢腿動作,和奧迪西很直線型的三道彎、盤腿、扭曲腰肢等動作,蘊含著很不同的空間使用觀和身體美學,也因此,當融合西方舞蹈的肢體訓練已成為一般台灣舞蹈創新的常態時,讓擁有當代舞蹈訓練的舞者,去學習其他非西方的「世界舞蹈」技術來實驗創作,似乎也是另一種頗有彈性的方向,這也讓人期待更多蒂摩爾古薪舞集的共製串連和分享。
Located in Pintung, the south of Taiwan, Tjimur Dance Theatre is dedicated to indigenous Paiwan dance with contemporary interpretations and has long been proactive in terms of international exchange and contemporary performing art exchange. During its 2019 Tjimur Arts Festival, Tjimur Dance Theatre collaborated with Kaishiki Nrityabhasha, an Odissi dance institute from the east of India and staged performances every evening. With the philosophy of “searching for the contemporary in the traditional”, Tjimur has continuously explored new possibilities in Taiwanese and Indian dance on the basis of reinterpreting and rediscovering the past.
These international representations took place in the small rehearsal studio at Tjimur Dance Theatre, which was packed with passionate audience members. There was a total of nine dances performed by dancers from Taiwan and India. Some were created and performed by individual companies; others were collaborations. The series of performance started with more traditional classical choreographies and gradually transited to innovative modern creations, including “Paiwan Ballad”, “Sabhinay”, “Paiwan Traditional Dance”, “ai~sa sa” and “Pausev”. The traditional
chanting in classical Paiwan dance could be observed in the first few dances. The dancers, dressed in dazzling classical tribal consumes and wearing shining long strings of beads, moved their bodies to the rhythm of the singing, forming elegant silhouettes and postures. They created a beautiful contrast to the gentle gaze of the Odissi dancers, who bent several body parts simultaneously with a flamboyant nature. In “ai~sa sa”, performers dressed in contemporary attires danced with ease and exuberance like carefree young boys and girls, incorporating the use of props and theatrical techniques that are characteristic of dance theatre. In the lively singing of French songs, the dancers sometimes made exaggerated and dramatic facial expressions, sometimes clapped their hands to enliven the atmosphere; they took turns moving around demonstrating various movements, which sent out a breath of fresh air to the viewers. In addition to the use of experimental musical instruments, there were also improvised vocal accompaniments. What is particularly impressive is the clever partnership between either Indian dancers and Taiwanese indigenous musicians or Taiwanese dancers and Indian singers. We could not help but exclaim how art creators of different cultural backgrounds can dance in harmony thanks to the universal language of music.
The last dance of the series, titled “XVII”, was particularly attention grabbing. Revolutionising the concept of traditional Odissi dance, in which beat-counting is incorporated, the dance invited the audience to reexamine the possibilities of body, rhythm, beat-counting and movement. The Indian dancers wore loose trousers made of non-conventional materials, counting “one, two, three, four...” while gesturing the numbers simultaneously. Sometimes they gestured out shapes of arrows and numbers as if demons-trating a tongue-twister with a sign language. The choreography not only challenged the recognition and coordination of the dancers but also reminded the audience of an important feature in the contemporary Paiwan body language developed by Tjimur is for the body movement to be initiated by vocalising. The centre of weight is oriented downwards as if stepping steadily on the soil. Then, by means of the shifting of weight, the movement of stepping and lifting would naturally generate a rhythm which is steady, coordinated and uniformed. Based on this repetitive rhythmic movement, Tjimur has created a movement quality which is simple and regular, almost resembling the minimalism in post-modern dance. This newly re-interpreted contemporary Paiwan body aesthetics is a metamorphosis of the traditional. From this point of view, it can be said that “XVII” not only innovated the contemporary physicality of Paiwan dance but also transformed the shared musicality (as well as the body rhythm in reaction to the music) from the viewpoint of another kind of “music” (using body parts to count the rhythm). In this sense, what is international about this dance transcends the level of cultural diversity; it has connected the features of two dance genres and further experimented with these two classical dance types.
The experimental nature of this performance has also raised a couple of unprecedented questions. For instance, the Indian music masters communicated with the dancers by using hand bells during the performances. Together with the special feature of Odissi beat counting, how are these codes of music and dance transformed in this collaborative innovation, and how are they implemented? How is the ritual spirit shared by both Indian dance and Paiwan dance conveyed? Can the ritual spirit of these traditional dances form a part of the contemporary dance vocabulary by means of simplification and repetition in both kinds of dance, in particular Indian dance, which is characterised by eye movements and codified body languages? Also noteworthy is that Paiwan dance and Odissi dance have very different ways of using the space and body aesthetics when we compare the use of circle dance and modernised leg kicking in Paiwan dance and the linear body curves, leg crossings and back bending of Odissi dance. From this perspective, while the norm of dance training in Taiwan has long incorporated western dance styles, it seems to be an adequate alternative for dancers with contemporary dance training to learn and experiment with non-western world dance techniques. We thus look forward to more collaboration and sharing of Tjimur Dance Theatre.
These international representations took place in the small rehearsal studio at Tjimur Dance Theatre, which was packed with passionate audience members. There was a total of nine dances performed by dancers from Taiwan and India. Some were created and performed by individual companies; others were collaborations. The series of performance started with more traditional classical choreographies and gradually transited to innovative modern creations, including “Paiwan Ballad”, “Sabhinay”, “Paiwan Traditional Dance”, “ai~sa sa” and “Pausev”. The traditional
chanting in classical Paiwan dance could be observed in the first few dances. The dancers, dressed in dazzling classical tribal consumes and wearing shining long strings of beads, moved their bodies to the rhythm of the singing, forming elegant silhouettes and postures. They created a beautiful contrast to the gentle gaze of the Odissi dancers, who bent several body parts simultaneously with a flamboyant nature. In “ai~sa sa”, performers dressed in contemporary attires danced with ease and exuberance like carefree young boys and girls, incorporating the use of props and theatrical techniques that are characteristic of dance theatre. In the lively singing of French songs, the dancers sometimes made exaggerated and dramatic facial expressions, sometimes clapped their hands to enliven the atmosphere; they took turns moving around demonstrating various movements, which sent out a breath of fresh air to the viewers. In addition to the use of experimental musical instruments, there were also improvised vocal accompaniments. What is particularly impressive is the clever partnership between either Indian dancers and Taiwanese indigenous musicians or Taiwanese dancers and Indian singers. We could not help but exclaim how art creators of different cultural backgrounds can dance in harmony thanks to the universal language of music.
The last dance of the series, titled “XVII”, was particularly attention grabbing. Revolutionising the concept of traditional Odissi dance, in which beat-counting is incorporated, the dance invited the audience to reexamine the possibilities of body, rhythm, beat-counting and movement. The Indian dancers wore loose trousers made of non-conventional materials, counting “one, two, three, four...” while gesturing the numbers simultaneously. Sometimes they gestured out shapes of arrows and numbers as if demons-trating a tongue-twister with a sign language. The choreography not only challenged the recognition and coordination of the dancers but also reminded the audience of an important feature in the contemporary Paiwan body language developed by Tjimur is for the body movement to be initiated by vocalising. The centre of weight is oriented downwards as if stepping steadily on the soil. Then, by means of the shifting of weight, the movement of stepping and lifting would naturally generate a rhythm which is steady, coordinated and uniformed. Based on this repetitive rhythmic movement, Tjimur has created a movement quality which is simple and regular, almost resembling the minimalism in post-modern dance. This newly re-interpreted contemporary Paiwan body aesthetics is a metamorphosis of the traditional. From this point of view, it can be said that “XVII” not only innovated the contemporary physicality of Paiwan dance but also transformed the shared musicality (as well as the body rhythm in reaction to the music) from the viewpoint of another kind of “music” (using body parts to count the rhythm). In this sense, what is international about this dance transcends the level of cultural diversity; it has connected the features of two dance genres and further experimented with these two classical dance types.
The experimental nature of this performance has also raised a couple of unprecedented questions. For instance, the Indian music masters communicated with the dancers by using hand bells during the performances. Together with the special feature of Odissi beat counting, how are these codes of music and dance transformed in this collaborative innovation, and how are they implemented? How is the ritual spirit shared by both Indian dance and Paiwan dance conveyed? Can the ritual spirit of these traditional dances form a part of the contemporary dance vocabulary by means of simplification and repetition in both kinds of dance, in particular Indian dance, which is characterised by eye movements and codified body languages? Also noteworthy is that Paiwan dance and Odissi dance have very different ways of using the space and body aesthetics when we compare the use of circle dance and modernised leg kicking in Paiwan dance and the linear body curves, leg crossings and back bending of Odissi dance. From this perspective, while the norm of dance training in Taiwan has long incorporated western dance styles, it seems to be an adequate alternative for dancers with contemporary dance training to learn and experiment with non-western world dance techniques. We thus look forward to more collaboration and sharing of Tjimur Dance Theatre.