TV

So You Think You Can Make Me Like Dance?

Rubenstein views dance much like his girlfriend watches a baseball game; the subtleties are lost on him.

Sunday night is typically my least favorite time of the week. The weekend’s over and the long work week looms ahead, with only a half-finished New York Times crossword puzzle and another depressing episode of Mad Men for distraction (I’m usually too burned out on football by that point). That was until, one fateful Sunday evening while flipping through the channels, I happened upon Can I Step With You?, a Chicago cable-access show featuring color-coordinated couples dancing to smooth R&B at a south side (Chicago's south side, that is) nightclub.

It’s kind of like a more refined, mature version of MTV’s The Grind. Watching these people do the step, the bop and the walk is a lot more soothing than witnessing Don Draper’s life unravel, and it never fails to boost my mood.

My girlfriend’s favorite televised dance show, So You Think You Can Dance, usually has the opposite effect. For those not familiar, So You Think You Can Dance is an American Idol-style dance competition featuring famous choreographers who challenge contestants to master everything from hip-hop to modern to Eastern European styles. Its judging panel includes two regulars: Nigel Lythgoe, famed dancer, choreographer and producer of Britain’s Pop Idol, and Mary Murphy, ballroom champion, acclaimed choreographer and easily excitable screecher. She cries occasionally, too.

Like American Idol when So You Think You Can Dance on, it’s on. Once the real competition gets started, the show can air as much as three hours per week. As a result, I got to know the Season Five contestants fairly well over this past summer. I’m not saying I was heavily debating whether Brandon or Jeanine should’ve won (Jeanine did), but I at least knew who those people were, and saw some of the routines that made them “America’s favorite dancers”.

So I had at least some idea of what I was getting into when, in early October, I surprised Angela with tickets to the So You Think You Can Dance live show at Chicago’s United Center. This was why I drank a lot of wine beforehand. I was one of the few members of the audience who had such a luxury, as the majority of those in attendance were either underage (I’d put the average age at about 14) or would have to drive the carpool back to the ‘burbs. It should go without saying that there was not much of a wait for the men’s bathroom.

We settled into our too-far-away seats (I have no idea what I’m doing when it comes to buying tickets for a dance show) just as the show began with a group dance, featuring the final 12 contestants (six girls, six guys) from Season Five. I will admit that these people don’t just think they can dance – they definitely can. They execute moves that I could never imagine attempting for fear of dislocating something, and it’s all the more impressive that, while on the show, they learn to do things outside of their particular styles in a matter of a few days. If you like seeing well-toned bodies moving in perfect sync to the music and with each other, you could do a lot worse than this batch of “amateurs”.

So You Think You Can Dance is controlled at least partly by audience vote, more so as the season progresses. Not surprisingly, hormone-fueled teen girls don’t always make the “right” decision. As each dancer took the stage (the bulk of the live show consisted of recreated routines shown during the season, interspersed with “funny” introductions and short individual spotlights), Angela would explain whether they’d been screwed over by the process or had nabbed a top spot undeservedly.

This happens in most voting-related shows, but I can see why it would be more difficult to choose from among good dancers than, say, good singers. Unless there’s an obvious slip-up, the performances are judged on whether a contestant is deemed to have truly passed himself off as a particular type of dancer, or to have put her heart into every movement -- at least that's what I understand from the judges' often confusing comments. (Mia Michaels: "You have the potential of being in the books of history if you take it seriously and go for it and break down those walls and those boundaries. Get them gone, make them go away, Danny. Whatever it is that's keeping you chained a little bit, break it because you are beyond, beyond, beyond. BEYOND.")

It seems pretty subjective. Granted, you could say that about almost any sort of art, but I rarely sit and contemplate other art forms for nearly three consecutive hours. (Yes, I am the best boyfriend ever).

Having attended one of the live events a few years before, Angela knew to expect at least one “tear-jerker” performance during the set. This year, there were two: one was a portrayal of addiction, while the other showed a couple dealing with the woman’s battle with cancer. In both cases, I knew I was supposed to feel something, yet I saw nothing in the choreography that made me especially goose-bumpy. My only clue that these were sad dances (besides the “you might want to get the tissues out” intros) was the somewhat somber music.

I’m not trying to diss the choreographers, who are very talented and respected in their field. It’s just that I view dance like Angela watches a baseball game; the subtleties are lost on me. I’ll say I liked a dance if I liked the song it was set to (and there’s a pretty good soundtrack for the show, including everything from Ciara and Justin Timberlake’s “Love Sex Magic” to “Get Me to the Church on Time”) and if there are a few mind-boggling moves. The emotional side of it doesn’t really come through for me, though, and I don’t think it would no matter how close we were sitting to the dancers. Without that element, I’m never going to be invested in the show or understand its appeal for more than a few minutes at a time.

Not that it matters, as So You Think You Can Dance doesn’t need me. As long as there are hordes of overexcited tweens (and the occasional 27-year-old geometry teacher) willing to watch every night and maybe buy a few cheesy $30 t-shirts, the producers have done their job. If you’re not in that group, but wouldn’t mind a quick dance fix every once in a while, and you happen to live in the Chicago area, I’d recommend turning on Channel 11 at 8:30PM on Sunday nights.

Can I Step With You? may not have big-time choreography, technical proficiency or sex appeal, but it also requires no text-messaging ability nor a critical eye of any kind. All viewers are expected to do is to enjoy the groove, and maybe do a little dancing of their own. Best of all, because there are no announcers and no judges, there’s absolutely no screeching.

The year in song reflected the state of the world around us. Here are the 70 songs that spoke to us this year.

70. The Horrors - "Machine"

On their fifth album V, the Horrors expand on the bright, psychedelic territory they explored with Luminous, anchoring the ten new tracks with retro synths and guitar fuzz freakouts. "Machine" is the delicious outlier and the most vitriolic cut on the record, with Faris Badwan belting out accusations to the song's subject, who may even be us. The concept of alienation is nothing new, but here the Brits incorporate a beautiful metaphor of an insect trapped in amber as an illustration of the human caught within modernity. Whether our trappings are technological, psychological, or something else entirely makes the statement all the more chilling. - Tristan Kneschke

Keep reading... Show less

This has been a remarkable year for shoegaze. If it were only for the re-raising of two central pillars of the initial scene it would still have been enough, but that wasn't even the half of it.

It hardly needs to be said that the last 12 months haven't been everyone's favorite, but it does deserve to be noted that 2017 has been a remarkable year for shoegaze. If it were only for the re-raising of two central pillars of the initial scene it would still have been enough, but that wasn't even the half of it. Other longtime dreamers either reappeared or kept up their recent hot streaks, and a number of relative newcomers established their place in what has become one of the more robust rock subgenre subcultures out there.

Keep reading... Show less
Theatre

​'The Ferryman': Ephemeral Ideas, Eternal Tragedies

The current cast of The Ferryman in London's West End. Photo by Johan Persson. (Courtesy of The Corner Shop)

Staggeringly multi-layered, dangerously fast-paced and rich in characterizations, dialogue and context, Jez Butterworth's new hit about a family during the time of Ireland's the Troubles leaves the audience breathless, sweaty and tearful, in a nightmarish, dry-heaving haze.

"Vanishing. It's a powerful word, that"

Northern Ireland, Rural Derry, 1981, nighttime. The local ringleader of the Irish Republican Army gun-toting comrades ambushes a priest and tells him that the body of one Seamus Carney has been recovered. It is said that the man had spent a full ten years rotting in a bog. The IRA gunslinger, Muldoon, orders the priest to arrange for the Carney family not to utter a word of what had happened to the wretched man.

Keep reading... Show less
10

Aaron Sorkin's real-life twister about Molly Bloom, an Olympic skier turned high-stakes poker wrangler, is scorchingly fun but never takes its heroine as seriously as the men.

Chances are, we will never see a heartwarming Aaron Sorkin movie about somebody with a learning disability or severe handicap they had to overcome. This is for the best. The most caffeinated major American screenwriter, Sorkin only seems to find his voice when inhabiting a frantically energetic persona whose thoughts outrun their ability to verbalize and emote them. The start of his latest movie, Molly's Game, is so resolutely Sorkin-esque that it's almost a self-parody. Only this time, like most of his better work, it's based on a true story.

Keep reading... Show less
7

There's something characteristically English about the Royal Society, whereby strangers gather under the aegis of some shared interest to read, study, and form friendships and in which they are implicitly agreed to exist insulated and apart from political differences.

There is an amusing detail in The Curious World of Samuel Pepys and John Evelyn that is emblematic of the kind of intellectual passions that animated the educated elite of late 17th-century England. We learn that Henry Oldenburg, the first secretary of the Royal Society, had for many years carried on a bitter dispute with Robert Hooke, one of the great polymaths of the era whose name still appears to students of physics and biology. Was the root of their quarrel a personality clash, was it over money or property, over love, ego, values? Something simple and recognizable? The precise source of their conflict was none of the above exactly but is nevertheless revealing of a specific early modern English context: They were in dispute, Margaret Willes writes, "over the development of the balance-spring regulator watch mechanism."

Keep reading... Show less
8
Pop Ten
Mixed Media
PM Picks

© 1999-2017 Popmatters.com. All rights reserved.
Popmatters is wholly independently owned and operated.

rating-image