Photo – “Kitsch Cans – The Gold-Crested Toilets.” Outdoor ‘facilities’ Luzia – CDS
Jim Pickles is a Lecturer on Anatomy of Contortion. He is the Author and Researcher of the preferred text book on the anatomy and physiology of Hearing. Now in its 4th Edition. Jim is also a fan, student, and practitioner of Dance, Burlesque, Clown and Contortion.
Thoughts on Luzia – Cirque du Soleil.
Here are some thoughts – which are not connected, and which may be mutually contradictory – so I have put them as separate points, rather than as a connected narrative. For comment and discussion, and maybe I can make something logical out of them.
Fantastic acrobatics, as always. Many outstanding acts, particularly to me the double Russian Swing act. Wonderful amazing skill. Plus many others – though I would have liked to have seen even more bodies flying through the air – maybe I’m being greedy. Interesting to see the contortionist Alexey Goloborodko who must be the most flexible backbender in the world. He used to have very feminine movements (disconcerting in a male) which means that many circuses would not employ him – he has now masculinised his movements, and has become more gender neutral. Unfortunately he was too far away for me to see the movements and positions in detail.
So why did I not enjoy it more (bearing in mind that we expect the highest standards from the Cirque du Soleil)? The press release gives an idea: “LUZIA takes you to an imaginary Mexico … Freely inspired by Mexico, LUZIA is a poetic and acrobatic ode to the rich, vibrant culture of a country whose…..”.
Ummm … “Inspired by”: – danger words, meaning that it is ersatz, and as used by interior decorators when they can’t think of what to say. “Vibrant” – sounds like a new shopping centre.
Still, we can’t judge a physical circus by its use of AI in its press releases.
Clearly, Luzia is trying to create a “total world” in which we are immersed. In this I think it failed. It is instructive to compare it with a show that did this successfully – for instance Slava’s Snow Show. Why did Snow Show succeed where Luzia failed? Among other reasons:
1.The environment was much smaller in Snow Show – so we could become aware of the whole environment at once.
2. The cast was much smaller in Snow Show – so we could identify with the individuals.
3. Though both shows had outstanding effects (snow, rain etc), in Snow Show the mechanisms were obvious – paper released from the ceiling, fans, lights, fog machines, etc. There was no mystery in how it was done, so we could concentrate on the mystery of the effects on us. In Luzia some of the mechanisms were very complex and hidden. So for instance the “rain” came down in wonderful patterns, which could only have been created by computers and machines – so they ended up having only the same wondrous quality as moving billboards on the side of city buildings.
I’d make a contrast here with the butterfly that appeared early in Luzia – large simple and beautiful wings, lit up from the side and blown by fans. If all the effects had been like this it would have been wonderful.
Other things that jarred – what was the point of the giant horse? (though at least we could – just about – see the people who were moving it). It didn’t blend in. The giant dog (if that’s what it was) had more of a role, but still it didn’t blend in. The people dressed as giant cacti reminded me of Bananas in Pyjamas* more than anything. (*characters in an Australian children’s show that first aired over 40 years ago, for those who don’t know).
The “clown” interacting with the rain – clearly meant to symbolise the unpredictability of Mexican rainstorms. But what was he interacting with really? A computer program? Someone in the sound box flipping switches? Because we only saw a part of the interaction it lost most of its meaning. I wonder if a similar and better effect could have been obtained with another clown using a garden hose. At least then we could have had some “clown-ing”. And “symbolise” – another danger, because whenever anything is “symbolised” (rather than real) it loses energy.
Outside the ring: we were told that the “concessions” opened at 7 pm. “Concessions” – where people had paid presumably a lot of money for the opportunity to sell us things at inflated prices. Their use of this word emphasises the commercial aspect. And walking to the area with the “concessions”, I felt it was more like an airport or a casino than a circus. How different from a traditional circus where the artists themselves may be selling us the candy floss and popcorn from little stalls (which is probably what keeps the circus financially afloat).
Mentioning traditional circuses – a traditional circus stays removed from the everyday world that most of us live in. There a slightly ramshackle feel to a travelling traditional circus, which leads us to think that at any moment things could go wrong – which adds to the drama and tension. Thank goodness they don’t go wrong. In the smooth, polished, massive, expensive Cirque du Soleil productions, this tension is missing (though it reappears in the most dramatic – and dangerous – acrobatic acts).
Jim Pickles – Website – https://jimpflex.com.au – photo Jim as Professor Pantaloon
