So You Think You Can Dance? (Network Ten)

 

When I was a little boy, in the 80's, apart from being a famous writer, I wanted to dance. At the time, this wasn't in any way unique - in fact, it was a result of my connection with popular culture, where there was a distinct presence of The Dancer™. Dance was another way of performing, it was a valid artform of expression, and, what I particularly loved, it was the embodiment of the good old 80's Dreamer. The story of dance was the story of young kids with dreams in their hearts and a rhythm in their toes, who rose from the streets to "make it" in the bigtime. We would, as the anthem suggested, remember their name (...fame!), and it seemed, for a while, that it would indeed live forever. Popular culture was littered with dance crazes (from breakdancing to moonwalking), which spawned countless music and film exploitation goldmines (from Dirty Dancing to Electric Boogaloo) and, basically, had the whole world moving across that floor. Musical Theatre, one of the avenues of commercial dance, was huge. And in the projected cultural consciousness of our modern storytellers, the story of the dancer captured something integral to the human condition; in Flashdance, the underdog survived her hardship for inevitable triumph; in Footloose, dance became the metaphor for our rejection of the Orwellian future. Yes, little Aaron wanted to dance. Just like everybody else.

 

But then, along came the 90's, which, let's face it, was the end of many a party. The only people who cared about the latest broadway smash were in retirement villages. The 80's liberation of masculinity was counter-acted by a horrid return to archaic, repressive, self-conscious cultural concepts of what men "do" (dancing was certainly not one of them). Live music became less choreographed and staged, the presence of dance becoming a credibility faux-pas (goodbye to the era of the monumental Jackson and Madonna MTV epics). Localised community culture faded, for a number of reasons - funding, the internet, media globalisation destroying the power of the immediate environment, etc - and the dance groups and lessons that were a part of our local cultural life were no more. Soon, the storytellers were no longer telling the story of the dancer, for the dancer no longer captured our space in time. The world stopped dancing. Do you actually remember their names in Fame? No, I didn't think so.

It was, then, with eyes sparkling with just a hint of regression that, two years ago, I sat down to watch the latest surprise reality hit from the US, So You Think You Can Dance? As I discussed, once, the success of Dancing With The Stars had been promising - until it inevitably headed down the path of the more gutter dynamics of reality television - but, even so, it was a very "adult contemporary" context. It wasn't a hit with young people, that's for sure. And, at the end of the day, ballroom dancing was one of the few dance movements that never got a leg up in the 80's - primarily because it reeks of class and an ideology of "civilised" aspirations and concepts. Ballroom, in so many ways, is the antithesis to the 80's dream - where dance symbolised freedom, unbridled passion and rebellion (not at all the social pretense of the upper classes, but a fantasy of the little people). The repackaging of ballroom dancing in Dancing With The Stars was a perfect vehicle for celebrities wanting to showcase themselves in a flattering, even old fashioned, kind of light - but it had nothing to do with the real people on the streets. In So You Think You Can Dance? we now were asked to follow the road of young people with dreams. The chemistry was in place. But would it work?

Yes, it did. "This show has evangelised dance in modern America," beamed guest judge, Debbie Allen (one of the powerhouse figures of dance in the 80's). It sounds like the inflated rubbish we are given by every reality TV script - but it was actually a fair call, this time. The show was a huge success in the US, leaving Dancing with The Stars in the dust, and was eventually screened, to a surprisingly large following (considering that it was only ever aired as a kind of filler), here in Australia. I loved it. Now, here was crap commercial television being what, if it must be crap, it should be.

The first thing that worked for this show was, ironically, where the state of dance in popular culture was... basically, dead. Idol is inevitably compromised by the place of this show in the broader music industry; it's only going to pull a certain level of talent, because most "real" musos won't go anywhere near it's somewhat marred reputation as exploitative fodder for the gutter masses (we've only ever really had a couple who have stumbled, quite blindly, into the lion's den). But not so, with dance. Dance has no "big time", anymore - in comparison, getting a primetime showcase was a coup and a half for the world of dance. So, unlike Idol, this show actually managed to pull the cream of the crop from the world of young hopefuls who fell into its category. Idol has always felt like a P&O cruise (and increasingly so), but So You Think You Can Dance? was beaming the talent you'd expect on world-class stages, right into the living rooms of a public who hadn't connected with the medium for years. There may be that retro element to the show; but, because of this, it actually felt fresh and alive, at a time when reality television was beginning to well and truly fester. It was a pleasure to watch.

However, the amazing aspect of this show - put in the context of the evolution of the reality genre - was its tone. Trust the dream of dance to sell inspiration and good old-fashioned entertainment to the world. Gone was the sadistic pleasure of Big Brother and Idol, the thrill of social mauling. Gone was the contrived emphasis on the "stories" behind the talent, in place of what that talent actually was (in this case, dancing). So You Think You Can Dance? was an unashamedly lovely affair - even the so-called "tough" judge was now simply that - a bit tough - rather than modeled of the playground bully (aka Cowell, Dicko, Sandilands, etc). Everybody seemed to genuinely get along, to sincerely believe in what they were doing, and to actually care about what happened to those youngsters. The audiences turned up for the thrill of championing those who inspire and entertained them; not to see the latest scandal, or to condemn those they hated. It was large and glitzy, sure; but, underneath, was something gentle and human. You could take it or leave it, but you couldn't really put a bad word against it. And, let's face it, when I can't put a bad word against a reality show, then you know something's going on!

Soon, the inevitable would happen, and Ten would make the obvious decision and throw funding at a local production of the smash series. Big Brother is in a serious dilemma, the latest season of Idol did not further capitalise on the small resurrection its 2006 season enjoyed, and The Biggest Loser had proved a flash in the frying pan. Uh-oh, nasty reality television, is that the bells of your doom I hear in the background? I'd prefer the beat of the dancefloor. C'mon, Ten, bring it on.

It was, then, with great anticipation that I rocked up to the unleashing of what seems Ten's only current reality hope, but, sadly, I left feeling somewhat disillusioned. Those first shows weren't a nightmare, particularly - they were just more than a little flat. What was most worrying was that it seemed the production team had endeavoured to give the show its own Australian twist - which, quite tiresomely, seemed to be a decision to inject more of the (yaaawn) Reality TV Plight™ into the mix. The American version did have this element to those initial audition shows, but it was certainly less a part of it than the Aussie producers had clearly spent all their energy (and editing) on. You'll always find those stories in such a context - and they're valid, often constructive, and quite engaging. But there's no need to focus on them, to the level where all the material seems to be edited to a point where its so blatantly trying to squeeze every last drop of hardship out of the day's proceedings. This still should be about the dancing - the American producers seemed to understand this, but it's lost on their Australian counterparts. It was like heartbreaking story of hardship, after heartbreaking story of hardship - oh, and every now and then, they'd do a little dance. And what's even worse was that I do suspect that some people were being put through over others who lacked the sell of the Plight™, and, well, that's a bit yucky. The spark of the American series seems strangled by the Australian way of reality TV.

What the producers need to realise is that, sometimes, more is actually less. So saturated with the Plight™ was the show - so many Plights™ were there - in the end, they lost their punch, anyway, which actually does a great injustice to the reality of those Plights™ (that they are, after all, mostly real). Unfortunately, it feels so contrived - because the production and treatment of them are - the impact is lessened. During last night's first dance-off, I must sadly confess that, at one point, I actually laughed at the overkill of the Plight™, when it came to about the twelfth story of struggle - which is terribly shameful, because beneath this moment was a real girl with a real plight. On came Kate (one of the best dancers, might I add), to which my viewing buddy joked; "I wonder what hardship she's had?"

"When Kate was born," said her Mother, beginning her daughter's introduction video, above Emotive™ music, "she was born with a hole in her spine."

And we laughed - as awful as that is. But we weren't laughing at Kate - who has, after all, every right to her story - but at the show. It was taking these real situations and making them painfully cheesy, for a viewing audience that - as I've warned, all along - now have a developed sense of what the genre "is", and the tricks of the production that are used as hooks. At least Kate was pretty and white, and, in this way, strayed from the rest of the show. Because the only other observation, worth considering in light of this angle, was the perhaps telling variable in the only contestants who were not introduced by a profile video that did not feature a story of hardship - they were all good-looking, caucasian Aussies. The good-looking caucasian Aussies didn't have heartbreaking Plights™. They just had barbeques. Well, except for Kate - but I think she had the barbeque, too. Kate had it all.

The good news, here, is that we can presume that last night's show would hopefully have been the last hurrah of this element. It lends itself to the audition shows (which basically copied the Idol format), but has a harder time sustaining itself when the actual competition kicks in. Last night allowed it, because it forced its way in through the introductions (the most heavily scripted moments). And, I'll admit, one of the problems of this is that it does affect the public at a crucial time, when they are first deciding who they will cheer (and, perhaps, spend money voting) for. The hard fact of the matter is that most people choose their favourite off initial, somewhat superficial, cues; to get people to swing to or from a contestant requires something huge, like... say... a Reality TV Scandal™. And that's what I dislike about the manner in which Reality TV nearly always begins so scripted and contrived. It sets up a show that may not really be about the best dancer, as such; or, at very least, creates a narrative where the characters people take to are not necessarily the characters expressed through the medium of dance as a communicative artform. But, even so, the balance will now begin to tip, and I think this is a good thing. I'm all for the power of the human struggles beneath those reaching for their dreams (and, as discussed, it was a part of our 80's fascination with the dancer), but I think this Australian series has spoiled it through over-kill production. So, let's ignore it.

At least this did set up a nice surprise, last night, when it came down to the actual dancing. After the initial shows, where dancing seemed secondary, in contrast, last night's competition did actually showcase some talent. This is handy, because for those who watched the American show, this series needs all the moments of dancing ability it can put under that spotlight. One of the problems of this series was always going to be the contrast to the American stage, in terms of the talent. Perhaps that's why they made the decision to pump up The Plight™; but, regardless of how they cushion it, Australia - and this is not the fault of the actual show - simply can't compete with the kind of skill pooled in a country like America.

 

Firstly, America has at least sustained a slightly bigger culture of dance than we have, anyway (the hey-day subsided, but, unlike Australia, at least there was still some form of industry and cultural presence around it). But, secondly, it's a problem across the board, because we are simply too low a population. We can never match what a mass population and culture like America can produce - only in sport, helped by the cultural place of sport in our own culture, can we even scrape the sides of a powerhouse like America (like it or not). In some ways, they're lucky that the screenings of the American version were only taken up by a relatively small audience, in comparison to a primetime blockbuster, because I've spoken to many people who were already fans, and all seem to note the distinct difference in the level of talent. it's just not here. They're good, yes - good enough to sustain an audience - but the Americans were really jaw-dropping. It's the same with Idol; except, with Idol, we have no concept of the American version, and all that we do have came after we developed our sense of the Australian show.

This is apparent in the lack of trained dancers scored by the Australian series. Again, that's not the show's fault, because we live in a country where not many people do train to be a dancer - incomparable to a country the size of America - but to see people come up from the "gutters" of local jazz ballet classes was a bit of a shock. I do think that it also means we'll see a huge problem with people varying their personal styles. If you're a "real" dancer, chances are you're at least familiar with different styles. The American contestants had their own preferred genres or "schools", and came from different worlds of dance; but, even so, they were adaptable and familiar with the various styles, to some extent. Here, because of the level and place of dance, culturally, if you're one of the few who do choose the path of dance, it's very unlikely you'll branch out. The ballet dancers are ballet dancers, the breakdancers are breakdancers, and the ballroom dancers have never been on any other type of floor. I do think this is why each dancer was allowed to inject elements of their own style into what they were given - something that would never have been allowed in the stricter American version - to try to bridge the rather glaring gap in the dancers' abilities. The phrase, "You're out of your comfort zone", is something we're going to hear a lot of - and, granted, it was a recurring phrase in the American show. But, I think the reality of that may very well be more extreme - we saw that, in last night's show - and that's mildly worrying, because it means there's the possibility of quite a lot of "shockers" and disasters. This could fashion a difference in this Australian version, and leave it open to becoming the more familiar "car accident" territory that poisons the positivity of reality TV. In particular, I think Semsrah, the spunky aboriginal, could now be effectively set up by a show who saw the dollar signs in his character, for a fall that may be positively cringe-worthy to watch. But, again, they wanted The Plight™. I just wonder at what cost.

Still, last night's show did redeem itself, after what I thought were abominable lead-up audition shows. Even Natalie Bassingthwaite, who has been given the task to set up the arrival of her solo career - exploiting the nicer tone of show, as well as its broad appeal, to slowly recast her from the shallow electro-punk mask she donned for Rogue Traders, as Sony shades her with a touch of Delta (God help us all) - seemed to settle in to her role. Natalie can be as Delta as she likes, but it just doesn't work on her, and her hugging and sympathetic facial expressions, in those initial shows, were painful to watch. Last night, she slipped into a performance closer to her true style (which is, ironically, very Rogue Traders) and the series automatically benefited. She was cheesy, smutty, contrived and, well, came across a little bit like the kind of girl who walks out of the toilets at Hugo's, cheekily wiping her nose; but regardless, it still felt better - "comfortable", I suppose is the word - than her awful attempts at playing the nice girl of the little people. This is the girl who dated ex Big Brother housemates, and was frequently seen around town on the arm of anyone who could in any way be connected to a possible career, before scoring a role on Neighbours in a last ditch attempt (she's no spring chicken) to kickstart her own dreams. She may come from a certain kind of "gutter"; but nice girl of the people, she aint.

At the end of the day, I'm prepared to continue giving So You Think You Can Dance? my attention. Do I like it? Yes, I guess I still do. There's some down points, some potential, and an awful lot of grey matter, right now. It's too early to tell, after all. It's still a stark contrast to the world of Big Brother and Idol (and it's certainly better than the current series of Biggest Loser), so I stick to my guns that we are watching a worthwhile notch on the story of reality television. But the road to glory is long, and the tides of television productions known to change course at the drop of a hat - so, let's hold our breath, and reserve our final judgement for later. Anything could happen - or, maybe, nothing. "And you can dance," sang Madonna, who clawed her way to fame through being the aspiring dancer in 1982 New York, "for inspiration." This week's show  seemingly offered inspiration to a staggering audience, being the week's most watched program on Australian television. We'll see if that inspiration holds out, and what, exactly, it inspires.