敘述者:大野慶人(Yoshito Ohno)
無論如何只要是一個人,它就是不完整的。歸根究抵,人類就是一種不完整的存在。
舉例來說,土方巽(Tatsumi Hijikata)總是強調舞蹈中形式的重要性;他相信只要重視結構與編排,其中的內容隨後就會自行出現。以他自己的話來說,“生命總會趕上形式。”然而另一方面,大野一雄認為:只有在具有精神內涵作為開始的情況下,形式才會自己產生。雖然這二種途徑聽起來都很正確,但同一個人要同時執行這兩種如此衝突的方式幾乎是不可能的。
類似的戲劇性緊張狀態標示了我與我父親之間的工作關係。大野一雄的確將舞蹈的精神層面賦予了最高的重要性。大野一雄一向都是讓靈魂帶領著動作。對他而言,身體的動作絕對依賴於一個精神性的存在。相反地,我和他一起演出時,始終更為看重身體性的層面,盡可能地專注在舞蹈所採用的形式上。
關於我們二人途徑的不同有個很好的例子。那是發生在我們到東京的FM Hall,由鋼琴家Miyake Haruna伴奏演出『白蓮』的時候。舞台上擺著一座大鋼琴,它優美的弧線強烈地震撼了我,因此想利用它攝人的形體成為視覺上的背幕。然而大野一雄一如往常,不會有任何這類的想法。他說他要更自由地舞蹈,絕對不被他認為是無關緊要的道具所限制。
但我仍抱持相反立場,下定決心要讓那美麗的造型在這場舞台空間裡發揮作用。那時我想著:“可惡,如果大野一雄不想用這台鋼琴作為背景跳舞,那麼,我自己跳!”
還有,我們對空間的概念是截然不同的。大野一雄傾向於佔滿整個場景空間;他會自由地運用觀眾席,走道,地板,座位,或者任何他認為適合用來創造他的宇宙的地方中跳舞。而我,相反地,是在舞台範圍內的限定區域裡舞蹈。不過我將此點看作是我們工作關係上有正面價值的特色,因為對於與空間的關聯持著相對的觀點和方式只會更為豐富我們的作品。
大野一雄時常引用伊曼紐‧斯威登堡(Emanuel Swedenborg)的故事裡的一對夫妻。儘管他們天生就很不一樣,個性常常互相衝突,然而在他們將要離開這世間的那一刻,二人轉變為一致,並且結合成天堂裡一位單一的天使。我跟大野一雄在舞臺上的關係多少也可以這樣形容。即使各自擁有不同的特質,我們仍然成功地融合成一個整體,一個更大的整體。然而到了最後,就要踏上舞台之時,我們都能理解彼此分開的個體必須合在一起了。
儘管我們一起演出,但不會試圖去搶彼此的戲,或者想一較高下。然後在我們兩人的演出中彷彿創造出一個世界、單一的存在。
原文:“魂の糧” 第137,141頁
英譯本:
Irrespective of how accomplished or talented one may be, one inevitably remains incomplete without some form of interaction with others. Tatsumi Hijikata, for instance, always stressed the importance of form in dance; he believed that once the structure and choreography had been established, the content would subsequently emerge of itself. In his own words, “Life catches up with form.” Kazuo, on the other hand, even to this very day, holds the diametrically opposite view:form comes of itself, only insofar as there is a spiritual content to begin with. While both approaches sound like viable working practices, one and the same person could never employ such conflicting methods.
A similar dramatic tension underlines my working relationship with my father. It is Kazuo who places the utmost significance on the spiritual aspect of dance. For him, movement is utterly dependent on a spiritual presence. I, on the other hand, invariably emphasize the most physical aspects; I concentrate in as much as possible on the form dance assumes.
A good illustration of our differing approaches could be seen in when we performed A White Lotus in Bloom at Tokyo’s FM Hall accompanied by the pianist Miyake Haruna. There was a grand piano onstage, whose beautiful curved lines struck me forcefully. I wanted to try to incorporate its arresting shape into the visual backdrop. Yet Kazuo, in typical fashion, wouldn’t have anything of the sort. He said he wanted to dance more freely and not be in any way constrained by what he considered an unnecessary prop. Though our opinions openly clashed on this issue, I nonetheless was determined to avail of its beautiful shape in the scenic space. I thought to myself at the same time: “If Kazuo isn’t going to dance with that piano in the background, well then, damm it, I will!”
Also, our conceptions of space clearly differ: Kazuo is inclined to take advantage of the entire scenic space; he freely utilizes the auditorium, the aisles, the floor, the seats, or wherever he deems fit to create his universe. I, on the other hand, dancein a restricted area within the confines of the stage. But I consider this is a positive feature of our working relationship, in that having contrasting viewpoints and ways of relating to space only enriches our work.
Also, our conceptions of space clearly differ: Kazuo is inclined to take advantage of the entire scenic space; he freely utilizes the auditorium, the aisles, the floor, the seats, or wherever he deems fit to create his universe. I, on the other hand, dancein a restricted area within the confines of the stage. But I consider this is a positive feature of our working relationship, in that having contrasting viewpoints and ways of relating to space only enriches our work.
Kazuo frequently quotes from Swendenborg’s tale of a man and wife who, despite their inherently different, and often clashing personalities, went on to become reconciled and united as a single angel in heaven on their departure from this world.23 Our relationship onstage could be described in somewhat similar terms. While having separate identities and completely opposite approaches both to rehearsal and performance, we nonetheless successfully merge into a larger whole. And yet we somehow manage to retain our individual voices. Ultimately though, when it comes to setting foot onstage, we both realize that our separate identities must merge as one.
We don’t try to upstage each other or engage in rivalry. Notwithstanding that we are two individuals, with very independent streaks, the public is left with the impression that we jointly strive to create a single entity in our work.