{"id":6907,"date":"2007-06-29T17:39:00","date_gmt":"2007-06-29T15:39:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/blog.uclm.es\/archivoartea\/?p=6907"},"modified":"2026-04-04T17:16:03","modified_gmt":"2026-04-04T15:16:03","slug":"the-gaze-fixedly-in-motion","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/blog.uclm.es\/archivoartea\/2007\/06\/29\/the-gaze-fixedly-in-motion\/","title":{"rendered":"The gaze fixedly in motion"},"content":{"rendered":"\n

About La Ribot’s Treinta y cuatro pi\u00e8ces distingu\u00e9es & one striptease. <\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Jos\u00e9 A. S\u00e1nchez<\/a>. 2007.<\/h4>\n\n\n\n

Published in the DVD contain gin the film. See La Ribot\u2019s site<\/a>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\"\"<\/figure>\n\n\n\n

This film attempts to offer a documentary version of a long production process that began in Madrid in 1991 with the \u201cstriptease show\u201d Socorro! Gloria!<\/em> and concluded with the deployment<\/em> of the three series of distinguished pieces (1993, 1997, 2000) in successive presentations of Panoramix<\/em> (2003) in London, Geneva or Paris.  Although the goal was the tangible preservation of an ephemeral work, the film was inevitably destined to evolve into something more; just as the book La Ribot<\/em> (2004) brought the artist\u2019s creative constants and compositional interests to the printed page, so the film also offers a new projection of her concerns in a format that has already captured her interest in other recent works \u2013 digital video.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

            While the Piezas distinguidas <\/em>(Distinguished Pieces<\/em>) were conceived as a work about and from the body, Treintaycuatro pieces distingu\u00e9es & one striptease<\/em> is first and foremost a work about vision and the gaze.  The body ceases to be an object and becomes an excuse for fixing a certain gaze to which falls the responsibility of motion.  The film thus appears as the final destination of a journey that began in the theatre \u2013 in other words, with the observance of present body in action (Piezas distinguidas<\/em> y M\u00e1s distinguidas<\/em> [Distinguished Pieces<\/em> and More Distinguished<\/em>], first version) \u2013 moved on to the gallery and the museum, partially inverting the assignment of mobility and immobility to performer and spectators (M\u00e1s distinguidas,<\/em> second version, and Still Distinguished<\/em>), and concluded by putting gaze itself into motion. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

         Which gaze?  One could say that La Ribot wanted to establish one<\/em>, which she identifies as that of the ideal spectato<\/em>r: someone who not only has made the effort to follow her to wherever each of her pieces are performed, but who also, being familiarised with them, never hesitates to move at apparently inopportune moments, to concentrate on a detail, an object, fragment the image of the body, scatter, observe the audience, come and go, step between someone\u2019s legs or unabashedly sprawl before the performer on the floor to obtain the best angle of sight, someone who has enjoyed complete freedom but, as an ideal spectator, has managed to respect that which sets performance apart from painting or installation \u2013 all liberties have been afforded to him, except the freedom to alter the duration<\/em> of each piece. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

            The ideal spectator (like all ideal beings) is a construct: the sum of a series of very diverse recordings (in colour, black and white, of varying qualities, angles and framings, types of movement and filming criteria) made over the course of twelve years by technicians, friends, producers and video artists.  The spectator of the film is invited to take a journey in leaps and bounds<\/em> that transport him without a solution of continuity from a near time to a remote time and back again, from the observation of a mature body to a young body, from the image of a blonde woman to that of a woman with hair dyed blue or orange, from a dark and disorientating place to a large museum, a small gallery or a space discovered, from an atmosphere of complicity to a distant atmosphere, from relaxation to a motley state, from warmth to a feeling of glacial representation.  This is a journey stripped of experience and duration, for the duration and experience have already been set by the pieces and their live performance, and what has now been made available is undoubtedly a very singular document.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

            Since the object is the gaze, the editing process has shaken off the original chronology of the series as well as all those physical and technical limitations that still conditioned the composition of Panoramix<\/em>, which had to do with states of the body or the use of clothing items and objects.  Any order is possible, and this allows the themes \u2013 always of secondary importance during the process \u2013 to become pillars of composition, making it possible to articulate a new discourse that is always subtle and never overly explicit.  Now the \u201cstriptease\u201d loses its logical and technical function as a prologue and is placed in the middle, just after the first piece in the first series which it preceded on other occasions, while the \u201cmermaids,\u201d the two most stationary sequences (1993 and 2000), open and close the film. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

            It is no mere coincidence that the mermaids provide the framing brackets for the film. Their image takes us back to one of the nuclei of the creative project of the pieces: the imagination of a paused movement, an eloquent silence, an absent presence, an instantaneous dance, an entertaining death or a stable memory.  All of these antonyms find solution in the medium of film, the very definition of which also implies  a confrontation of opposites: the static and the dynamic.  What better way to continue the reflection on the themes that have appeared in the pieces than a medium based on producing the illusion of motion (and of life) by juxtaposing still images, one which also allows the position of author, performer and spectator to be filled simultaneously without abandoning the centrality of the body? <\/p>\n\n\n\n

            The Chinese used film to reformulate their notion of dance as a rhythmic interaction. The problem of weightlessness, which has caused classical dancers (and some contemporary ones as well) so much suffering over the past three centuries, also finds solution in film.  The simultaneity of pause and action, of immobility and motion, of weightiness and weightlessness that can be achieved using cinematographic techniques offers La Ribot new resources for developing the aesthetic of lightness that she has consciously practised for years. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

            Lightness is inseparable from humour, which in La Ribot\u2019s case refers to a tradition that could include artists as diverse as Eric Satie (one of whose waltzes inspired the title of her pieces), Buster Keaton (the distant comedian), Joan Brossa (writer of so many \u201cstripteases\u201d) or Piero Manzoni (seller of intangible works).  All of these individuals share a certain creative modesty<\/em> that drove them to create by \u201cmaking do with the means at hand,\u201d like the bricoleurs <\/em>in whose unpretentious action L\u00e9vi-Strauss discovered a thought that was inaccessible to those who insisted on observing them from a position of scientific rationality or, in our case, according to the criteria of the high institution called Art. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

            In her work with objects and spaces over twelve years of composing the pieces, La Ribot has always shown an obvious passion for bricolage<\/em> or do-it-yourself projects, which now acquires new effectiveness: the cinematographic act of bricolage<\/em> grants apparent physicality to that which the spectator can only see as an effect of light on the screen.  The bricolage<\/em> arrangement subjects the medium of film to a tension (similar to that which was previously imposed upon the stage or the exhibition space) that seems to question one of its traits \u2013 immateriality.  It is as if the absence of the body were compensated by an almost tactile treatment of the image, as if the editing and mounting of the digitalised images was intended to make the manual intervention visible.          <\/p>\n\n\n\n

             Bricolage<\/em> justifies the deficient technical quality of some sequences, the use of opposed<\/em> editing effects, but it also encourages the manipulation of the image of the bodies captured in the images, both her own (that of La Ribot), which is shown from angles that are inaccessible to the stage spectator (extreme close-ups, overhead shots, extreme low shots\u2026) and that of the spectators who contribute to the piece with their gazes, gestures, clothing, colours, moods and the various qualities that identify them as members of moderately diverse social or cultural groups.  <\/p>\n\n\n\n

            In appropriating the gaze, in fixing the \u201cideal spectator,\u201d La Ribot has also appropriated the image of her spectators; she has turned them into extras<\/em>, confronting them with the truth that no act of looking is free.  Not even this film?  Perhaps in this case the spectator can rest a bit easier; predictably, the process has reached its conclusion.  Hasn\u2019t it?.  <\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

About La Ribot’s Treinta y cuatro pi\u00e8ces distingu\u00e9es & one striptease. Jos\u00e9 A. S\u00e1nchez. 2007.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":285,"featured_media":6908,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[224,188],"tags":[339],"class_list":["post-6907","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-textos-de-jose-a-sanchez","category-texts-en","tag-nueva-danza"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/blog.uclm.es\/archivoartea\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/6907","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/blog.uclm.es\/archivoartea\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/blog.uclm.es\/archivoartea\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blog.uclm.es\/archivoartea\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/285"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blog.uclm.es\/archivoartea\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=6907"}],"version-history":[{"count":3,"href":"https:\/\/blog.uclm.es\/archivoartea\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/6907\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":6929,"href":"https:\/\/blog.uclm.es\/archivoartea\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/6907\/revisions\/6929"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blog.uclm.es\/archivoartea\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/6908"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/blog.uclm.es\/archivoartea\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=6907"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blog.uclm.es\/archivoartea\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=6907"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blog.uclm.es\/archivoartea\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=6907"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}