Choreographer of the year: Sergio Trujillo? — Page 2

PalJoey, that's so true. I'd actually forgotten about that (I have an awful memory). So glad you reminded me. I loved that whole sequence and the staging was a big part of it.

---

I don't think anyone suggested it wasn't choreography. I think they believe it wasn't GOOD choreography. And I'm with Wonderwa11 on this one. The choreography for SA was ridiculous. Jumping around and herky-jerky robotic hand motions do not GOOD choreography make. But that's been re-hashed a thousand times here already so I'll stop there.

More to the point, you write:

"I don't see Trujillo as having that same style as in saying "oh, I can totally tell that's a Trujillo move."

With the possible exception of Twyla Tharp, are there ANY choreographers working on Broadway today that can truly be said to have a "signature" style. Or forget signature style -- is there anyone working today who has shown promise for creating, re-defining or heck, even just expanding the "language" of theatrical dance a la de Mille, Robbins, Bennett or Fosse?

Regrettably, I feel like the answer is no. Even Twyla isn't revolutionizing theatrical dance. She's putting her style of dance -- remarkable as it is -- on Broadway so inherently, it can be included in the discussion, but unless/until she creates something for Broadway that is a theatrical piece first and a dance piece second (something that isn't just a string of individual dances hung on a very loose plot, albeit thrillingly), she remains an outsider whose work isn't likely to have much effect down the road on theatrical dance.

---

Say what you will about Jones (I didn't care for Fela!), but I thought his work on Spring Awakening was pretty brilliant. Just because it doesn't involve lifts and unison dancing doesn't mean it's not choreography.

And just because it's different doesn't mean it is brilliant. It added NOTHING to the story or feeling of the show. It was just laughable. The purpose of having choreography in a show is to help set the tone. The choreography in Spring Awakening does not do that. It just looks ridiculous and out of place.

We are clearly talking about two different things. I agree with you that The Apple Tree choreography was awful, but I could still tell you it was done by Andy Blankenbuehler without looking in the playbill. I didn't mean that everything has to be done WELL in that signature style. Kathleen Marshall's Grease choreography was terrible, but it was still very Kathleen Marshall. My point is that it is very easy to recognize choreography done by the 4 people I mentioned, whether or not it is good or appropriate for a specific show.

it shouldn't take "any real dancer" to recognize the difference, if the style is sufficiently special. The fact that even to an avid theatregoer, Ashford often looks like Marshall (not so surprising since he assisted her) which often looks like Mitchell, says something about how homogenized Broadway dance has become.

I don't think it SHOULD require a dancer to recognize the difference, but anyone who is a dancer should. (EDIT: Allow me to clarify this sentence as on second glance its language is totally convoluted. I don't think one needs to be a dancer to recognize the difference. But, if one IS a dancer but cannot recognize the difference in these styles, something is seriously wrong). I don't agree with you that Marshall and Ashford look alike. Ashford is much more syncopated and accented by sharp movements on strong beats. Marshall is more fluid, each number being a sequence of movements flowing from one to the next. And Mitchell looks NOTHING like either of them.

Updated On: 12/29/09 at 12:00 PM

I agree with bjh. I'm a dancer myself and have performed both Marshall's and Ashford's choreography. Ashford's choreography is very tight, very sharp, and very springy (like a spring board). Where Marshall is a more loose and each movement blends and flows into each other.

If you're a dancer you should be able to tell the difference between choreographer's styles.

---