Akram Khan: Glitter without gut

‘Sensational’ choreographer struggles to go beyond the physical in his unique dance research

(Budapest) He has been called a ‘dance sensation’, and if the physical language that he creates is to be judged, Akram Khan does put on a whopping spectacle.

Only buried beneath his latest performance Kaash is an honest, sincere research that the choreographer himself admits are those aspects that were truly the most difficult to delve into. Khan edited them out.

« It was much deeper and much longer, » reflects Khan in an interview with ontheglobe.com, « but I was not convinced. So I cut away a lot of it which was more conceptual and has more text, since I haven’t found my own way in which to express a conceptual idea. »

« My work is very physical, and I think that is what excites people more, » he added.

Born in the UK of Bangladeshi origin, award winning choreographer Akram Khan brings down the barriers between the traditional Indian dance of Kathak and contemporary dance to find out what lies beyond. Highly skilled in both dance techniques, Khan teams up with some of the most gifted composers, lighting/set designers and dancers currently working in Britain and abroad.

In his most recent work Kaash, Khan teams up with the celebrated talents of the noted contemporary sculptor Anish Kapoor (set design) and Nitin Sawhney (composer) to present his company’s first full length evening work Kaash (Hindi word for « if »).

ontheglobe.com spoke with Akram Khan shortly after a recent Budapest performance.

Princz: How did you jump into the idea of bringing a traditional Indian dance form and molding it into a contemporary dance aesthetic? What is Khatac?

Khan: Kathak is a north-Indian classical dance. There are seven different Indian classical dance forms, and Kathak is the only one that has Islamic and Hindu influence. All of the other dance forms have a purely Hindu influence. Khatac is a narrative, story-telling dance form but it also has a powerfully abstract aspect.

What I am drawing on is inspiration, not just the technique of Kathak, but the energy, which is what I try to incorporate into the work that we do.

It really wasn’t my decision to get involved in Khatac, since I started when my mother pushed me into it. I was a very volatile kid, and extremely energetic. She put me into different kinds of a cultural activities, particularly Indian or Bengali folk dance.

She herself organized dance events in London, and there was always a boy needed in the pieces, whether they were plays, or dance.

Later she wanted me to take it a little bit more seriously, and she put me into a classical dance class. Then she saw Sri Pratap Pawar perform in London, and she was inspired, thinking it would be good if I would learn from a male dancer. So she sent me to him, and basically after that meeting, I have been doing Kathak ever since.

Contemporary dance happened much later when I went to University. My community is known, you might say it is a bit cliché, but most Indian people want their children to be a doctor, a law, an engineer or a computer wizard. For my part, I didn’t want to be any one of those.

I decided to do a degree to please my mother in one way, but also to satisfy myself. I decided to do it in dance. It happened to be contemporary dance. That’s where I discovered naked bodies and a whole world of different ways of expressing oneself. That was at twenty one, so really I started contemporary dance rather late.

Princz: Did you decide at the outset not to let go of traditional Indian dance, but to incorporate the elements in your work?

Khan: No. It was not a conscious decision, the body was doing it by itself. I didn’t consciously say that wanted to combine the two. The body was making the decisions on its own. When I did Khatak, my contemporary influence would come out in my Khatak, and when I did contemporary my Khatak would naturally be there. I can’t take ten years of my training away. So in my class I would always move very differently from the other contemporary dancers, because my body is informed with something very different. So both my classical and contemporary teachers were getting rather frustrated, so I decided in a way to investigate this frustration.

Princz: Many western choreographers are also looking to the organic work of non-Western cultures for inspiration, and adapting it to a Western aesthetic.

Khan: You know what is interesting is that I don’t think that Khatac is being adapted, but I think that it is happening organically. The first generation of Asians who came to London were intellectually trying to connect the two. But I have been born and brought up in London, so my influences are very different.

Even the way I present Khatac is very different, so I somehow feel like I have to say is more than just an interesting idea. When you think about where contemporary dance is going I think that it will be a connection of different cultures interacting with each other to express something quite unique. I think that this is what is happening to African dance. With Indian dance it has been tried many times before, but for many years it hasn’t quite been convincing.

Princz: There are, though, many cultures like in Russia for instance, where they simply don’t have the information, and the exchange is just stifled. And then you ask yourself the question if it really works the other way around. Does the Kathac master in India infuse a contemporary aesthetic in any way at all? So where is the exchange there?

Khan: What is happening is that it is my generation, people who are brought up in the West, who are saying something, and saying it convincingly. Sidi Larbi, who is a fantastic international choreographer brought up in Belgium of Flemish and Moroccan origin and influence. His work is fascinating through its Islamic, Arabian influence. It is fascinating since he uses the clash of cultures from his background, expressing what he has to say through these collisions.

There are others who are also making similar contributions in South Africa, and others who are making convincing work that is in a contemporary context but embalmed by their cultural background.

I hear what you say about the exchange, in that I suppose it is not happening in India. When I present my work in India, it is very different from lets say the Kathac there, it is very different because they don’t have the information of the contemporary aspect.

Princz: And what was the reaction in India?

Khan: Curiosity.

Princz: Did they recognize it?

Khan: It is different in London, and India. I think that it is a question of threat or insecurity. Now Indian communities who come out to Europe, we are the minority. And because they are the minority, they hold onto their culture much more strongly than in India.

In India itself, they are the majority where they are absolutely amazing at what they do, they do not feel threat about anything. Instead they feel curiosity. They don’t feel as if I’m trying to destroy their heritage at all.

Princz: The description of your work talks of, ‘Hindu Gods, black holes, Indian time cycles, five tables, creation and destruction » were the starting point for Kaash. How did these notions transform onto the stage? Is it possible that some of the subtleties are lost on Western audiences of all of these Gods, and rhythms that you describe?

Khan: When I research the work it is not important to me that the audience understand what I am researching, and I have nothing to say about that. I don’t have a statement to proclaim.

When I worked with Anish Kapoor, we did a lot of conceptual research at the beginning and came up with a very strong idea. Eventually when we went into the studio I wanted us to let go of that idea. When I show the idea in the end it is always second rate to what is in my head. The first idea that comes to you is always the strongest idea.

These black holes, these inspirations are what we fed ourselves, the information. Then we explored through improvisation, mathematical structures, breakdown of materials: physical things. I wanted to bring out those ideas physically, so in a way the work becomes narrative. It is not clearly narrative, not to the common eye, but there is a story underneath that.

I think it is similar in all of contemporary dance, it is not as clear as in classical dance where you know what happens from A to Z before you even go to see the show.

Princz: There was a moment of depth in Kaash where I felt what you speak about of interconnectivity of people- with the blue light where I felt as if you were going into a place of more depth, in contrast to the rest was a blur of surgically executed movements- but little content of greater interest. I felt as if you teased us with something really genuine and deep, and then you just backed off. What was this all about? I was left hungry!

Khan: The work is divided into three sections that are all based on Sheeva. Sheeva, in mythology, is the creator, preserver, and destroyer of the world. The first section is twenty minutes of onslaught- it is the preparation for war, which then goes into this purple blur.

The second is a very difficult section for me, one that we only touched upon it this time, but we’re going to touch upon it in more depth for the next piece. It is the philosophical aspect of the battle that you reflect on after it is over, more of a questioning of what you did and did not do. It is a more thought provoking aspect. The third is the re-creation, the re-birth of life again.

Princz: But why was this middle section left raw?

Khan: Well, probably because I haven’t found a satisfactory way to go deeper. It was much deeper and much longer, but I was not convinced. So I cut away a lot of it which was more conceptual and has more text, since I haven’t found my own way in which to express a conceptual idea. My work is very physical, and I think that is what excites people more.

Most work has gone towards the theater and dance. Suddenly they see a work that can see a language of movement without partner work…

Princz: What about artists like Emio Greco, and many other companies that rely on this kind of physicality. You seem to be avoiding something.

Khan: I am avoiding it. I am not convinced when people make conceptual work using text-based elements. Only sometimes am I convinced. I don’t want to touch it unless I know that there is something convincing in what we are saying. It is possible that we just touched upon the surface, but I didn’t want to go deeper in something and leave it the weaker part.

Princz: You have formed partnerships with some of today’s leasing contemporary figures. I’m thinking of Anish Kapoor and the likes. Why is it so important for you?

Khan: With Anish, the ideas that I was working with were in complete relation to what he does. I was exploring the concepts and ideas of physics, religion- and how they are directly developed. There is a strong sense in the physicists and philosophers that use Hindu mythology in their own work today: stories of Sheeva and Krishna.

I find the connection fascinating, and that is what I found interesting in the work of Anish Kapoor. The metaphysical illusion with reality, different kind of worlds- quantum universes existing with this one bigger universe. His work kind of says that, and I wanted to draw him in to have another dimension to the choreography.

Princz: Are you looking in the future to similar collaborations?

Khan: I am working with Annish again, collaboration is important for me. Collaboration is when the two artists meet, starting with the research, the talking period until the end, twenty-four-seven.

For this piece it didn’t quite work, he is so busy and famous- and we both agreed it wasn’t the kind of collaboration that was true. The next piece we will spend four months, and develop a kind of together sense of reality.

Princz: How do you, as a person from a Muslim background, deal with the current situation, the tensions between the Muslim and Western worlds?

Khan: I absorb the information, but I don’t show it in the work. Although maybe indirectly it seeps through, but I don’t hold it back, or intentionally avoid it. It is not something that I feel it necessary for me to say at this time of my life. This particular piece is based on Hindu mythology. The only time I did something Islamic was when I did a solo called Fix, which was based on a special art form. Khatac had historically collided with Suphi, so I wanted to show that aspect.

As a human being, though, it is very nerve wrecking. I am going to Moscow, and even as an American I have been given a hard time at the airports.

Princz: Does it give a different meaning to your audiences?

Khan: I think that the work goes above that. What is fascinating is that we performed in Israel, in Tel Aviv. The audience responded fantastically. That really convinced me that the work will always be stronger than whether I am Asian, Black, Christian or Muslim.

Princz: Life has been pretty fast paced in the past couple of years. Your star has been rising at an incredible pace.

Khan: It has been a roller coaster. It is extremely difficult, it has been high pressure. I went from doing solo-work, to being someone recognized as creating a new language of movement all over the world. It is something very difficult to deal with, and is a huge pressure.

Princz: Where are you in this process?

Khan: I am only in the beginning of this process. I do want to explore the text, the theatrical aspect more. Khatac has such a rich vocabulary and culture. At the moment I am exploring the mathematical, scientific and physical. I want to go more towards the narrative, text-based work.

Princz: You worked with Rosas, and choreographer Jonathan Burroughs, Sidi Larbi… Is there one experience that really got you going, that really inspired you?

Khan: I think that they have had great influence on my. But the more I make work, the less influence they have. I think that my earlier work, it had a lot of Jonathan, of Anna Theresa in it. The broader the work I make, the more of me it has. They have had a great influence, they were like starting points for me.

The first pieces were much more contemporary, and less Khatac. And I think that these roles are starting to reverse, with more Khatac, and less contemporary. I could just go and make another contemporary piece, but that is not what I want to do. I want to make something of mine, that is original to me, and that takes a lot of time.

I am working on another piece for 2004, that may be called Ma, or mother. Ma can mean many different things, like mother earth. This piece will take a lot more from the traditional Khatac. In this piece we had the vocabulary, and the next piece we will draw more from text based work.