Toxic White Elephant Shock

MAU Theatre, Corban Estate, Auckland

17/03/2009 - 18/03/2009

Auckland Fringe 2009

Production Details


Provocative and interdisciplinary choreographer Alexa Wilson is delighted to present the premiere performance of TOXIC WHITE ELEPHANT SHOCK

TOXIC WHITE ELEPHANT SHOCK is an innovative and avant-garde dance work that satirically layers theatricality with dance, film and sound in an explosion of toxically shocking experiences. 

This new work looks at how the world around us is suffering under the strain of increasing political, social and environmental pressure. It is experiencing toxic shock. The impact of this shockwave is mirrored in the disturbing physical and mental state of the people. Alexa Wilson states "This work aims to map current political and environmental toxicity or pollution into and onto the body".

Alexa Wilson’s career as an experimental choreographer spans not only a decade but a multitude of disciplines also – having crafted works in the field of performance art and video. Her 2004 work Magic Box received the NZ Listener’s "Best New Work by a Contemporary Choreographer" and has gone on to become an emerging filmmaker with a number of experimental, sometimes transgressive pieces behind her.

Toxic White Elephant Shock marks the first time one of her works has been awarded funding in the form of a Creative New Zealand grant plus Tup Lang Scholarship money for Emerging Choreographers. CNZ have funded a residency with Lemi Ponifasio – the renowned avant-garde artist and his Dance Company MAU.  This residency provides Alexa with the environment, support and resources to create a new interdisciplinary work on a larger scale than ever before.

"Alexa has an unrivaled will and commitment to her art. She is the future." Lemi Ponifasio

"Wilson’s creativity is a rich complex feast which deserves to be explored more fully… Her unnerving clarity and audacious style reveal an intellect and imagination capable of a major work" NZ Listener 2004 

Crossing over different mediums and different disciplines, it is apt that Toxic White Elephant Shock also crosses over different experiences from performers seasoned and new – including Liana Yew (2006 NZ Listener – "Best Female Contemporary Dancer"), Alana Yee (Mega Pash Action), Anja Packham (Fringe 2006 – "Honourable Mention for Most Outstanding Performer"), Georgie Goater (BackLit Production) and Sarah Gavina Campus (Touch Compass Dance Trust). 

The soundtrack to TOXIC WHITE ELEPHANT SHOCK is being created by Charlotte90 and experimental live musician Matt Brennan.

For more information visit 
Toxic White/Elephant Shock plays
8pm 17thand 18th March, 2009
MAU Theatre, Corban Estate, 426 Great North Road, Henderson, Waitakere city, AUCKLAND
Tickets $20/25
Bookings available through MAU: 09 836 9345 or  

Alexa Wilson, Liana Yew, Anja Packham, Sarah Campus, Alana Yee, Georgie Goater.
Matt Brennan (live), Charlotte 90 (composed, but she sang live too)

Videography: Kelly Moynihan
Costumes: Rosey Feltham
Lighting: Boris Williams
Sound Op: Sam Hamilton

Body dissolved in futile aggression

Review by Celine Sumic 20th Mar 2009

Life’s a party and we’re scratching at its surface, searching for meaning amongst a mountain of trash… 

Upstage, a horizontally directed spotlight pierces a wall of clear plastic which acts as a kind of ‘film’, filtering the blanket of light that spreads across the stage and onto the audience.  Combined with angled lighting from above, the result is of a compressed, horizontal performance field that feels a little like a prison courtyard.

As the work opens, my attention is divided between the large scale images of fire and pollution on the back wall of the theatre, a variety of dancers’ action on stage and Alexa Wilson expounding, in lectern style, on disease through a black balaclava. 

The choreographer’s stated philosophy of healing (via transformational theatrical fire) is played out on a surprisingly sparse set as the dancers enact expressions of a disfigured life in the mediatory haze created by the lighting, moving for the majority of the work in semi-silhouette. 

Anja Packham picks her way across the floor in bird-like movements that echo a pukeko gingerly crossing a polluted shoreline as Wilson’s narrative, initially delivered in a foreign accent – Scottish or Welsh perhaps? – soon transforms to a kiwi accent with the cry "PAAARRRTY!!!" 

Clearly the cue for action, the dancers – variously outfitted in a cross between Sgt Pepper’s Lonely Hearts Club Band and prison boiler suits – leap into wild dance-party mode.  Donning her roller skates, the narrator becomes skater, joining the dance party to skate circles around and between her barefooted colleagues.

Dominated by the magnitude of the projected images on the back wall of the theatre, as well as by the volume of the sound and the eclipse effect of the lighting configuration, the figure of the body is largely dissolved.

While the colour of the dancers’ clothing, alternating from primary bolds to subdued muds and khakis, introduces a sense of distinct personalities, for the most part this is not reflected in the choreography, which instead seems to deliver a range of multiple Alexas.

Boxed (literally at times, in cardboard) the repressed body and ‘the pain body’ (as lectured upon by Sarah Campus at one point in the work), is variously blind, in battle, screaming, swearing, leaping and gesticulating in defiance or collapsing upon an unforgiving ground.

In this way Toxic White Elephant Shock is a 2 hour long haul of disparate moments that could be appropriately summed up by Edward Munch’s painting The Scream – if only it could speak.

Speaking of screaming, Sarah Campus has a good go in an admirable section (while her considerable dance talents, like those of the other dancers in this work, are largely under-utilised), her voice blending eventually with that of another dancer as together they transform their voices into a chorus (albeit rather dissonant).

Vocal explorations, frequent reference to the vagina and infrequent declarations of love are further supported by the ‘lost and found’ sound score by Matt Brenan and Charlotte 90, who both feature on stage at times, as they cross /distort genres.  Contributing sound that ranges from ethereal winds and white noise to organic mixes reminiscent of Rotorua mud pools and David Lynch’s The Elephant Man, the sound is arguably the strongest element in this work.

Episodes of frequent physical struggle and verbal abuse are sprinkled throughout the performance and follow clothes being shed early in the scene by the whole company, resulting in a strange play on the value of the human body as described below. 

A naked pile up of ‘live’ crash test dummies is juxtaposed with projected video image of a simulated car accident / ‘real’ car crash ‘dummies’ /fake injured people…  Eventually the writhing conglomeration of flesh aka naked women on a filthy floor /collapsed pool of humanity, finds its feet – only to then be collectively spray painted with the phrase ‘SICK KUNTZ.’    All of which left me pondering the following deep, philosophical questions (which readers are most welcome to respond to in the comments section below this review):
1. What value, the naked body?
2. Did the choreographer understand that when she spray painted ‘SICK KUNTZ’ on some of her friends she wasn’t just dealing with a ‘human canvas’, that this isn’t ‘just a performance’, that this is ‘real’ – to quote one of her frequently used words?

Founded on the premise that a performance containing the repressed forces of wo/man will liberate him/her from them, Wilson’s aesthetic of conflict, irony and exposure reflects her perception of a world in global chaos that stands to benefit from her mix of intimate catharsis and ironic exposition.

This approach to theatre as oracle can be compared to the ideas of controversial French playwright Antonin Artaud, who in the 1930s became associated with a fundamental revolt against insincerity within the arts (thanks Wikipedia.)  Artaud’s ‘Theatre of Cruelty’ drew on the notion of primitive societies to envisage a new theatre as a theatre of magic – a mass participation in which the entire culture would find renewed vitality and truth of expression.

Artaud further defined his goal for a new theatre in spiritual terms as does Wilson, desiring a kind of frenzy and moving violence, with the intention being to disturb the spectator’s state of mind and jolt the senses in order to liberate the spectator towards a renewed consciousness.

While this may have made sense in Artaud’s time, in the context of the current era I find this approach and the use of nudity and violence in performance impotent, given the saturation of sex and violence within our contemporary digitally mediatised culture.

Ultimately, while Toxic White Elephant Shock is indisputably chaotic, in spite of the intellectual tease provided by the satirical layering of the work, in its current manifestation it carries limited dramatic power. 

While the work does contain some moments of colour, (for example when Georgie Goater, with a Venus-like quality, enacts a brief solo and seems to encapsulate the beauty of the world in her movement), for the main part the canvas of this work is steeped in a dull haze of apparently futile aggression. 

In conclusion, regardless of the global environmental concerns alluded to and the spiritual, shamanistic ambitions purportedly contained within the work, my interpretation of Toxic White Elephant Shock is that a conflicted relationship with media and men lies at the core of the work. In the end, it’s the combined exposition of creative conflict and amorous frustration that takes centre stage, and while this theme may have a universal dimension it’s not the one advertised in the program.


lacoco March 26th, 2009

Wait. What has Sick Disco got to do with Celine's sexuality?

alexa wilson March 25th, 2009

na you're not wild you just need to GET A LIFE.

Celine Sumic March 24th, 2009

ah, yeah - well, actually, truth be told - I'm a little wild (but it's a closely guarded secret ok, so don't tell anyone)
lovely to hear from you,

thiswillalsochange March 24th, 2009

... a strict heterosexual ... hmmm .. sounds kinky celine... the choreography here on the west coast USA is ,like , totally and utterly boring in comparison to there. like comment: this relatively new space/field -review forum- for developing community understanding, communicating ideas, opinions, creative discussion/outlet, potential for much corruption and enlightenment, enjoy the process x val

Celine Sumic March 24th, 2009

I find no humour in adolescent thuggery disguised as art and /or academia.

Whether using your collective voice as adolescent thug or academic thug, I find nothing to admire in 'YellingMouth's,' philosophy, clearly founded on a paradigm of exclusion and aggression.

The public and private violence directed towards me by members of YellingMouth does nothing to elevate you in my esteem.  With every personal insult you heap upon me, you shoot yourselves in the foot.

Good luck dancing on those feet

alexa wilson March 23rd, 2009

Because it is a postmodern work as Cat has stated. Must we educate NZ audiences what this work entails endlessly? Are we so isolated and behind the times?

Postmodern art/film/dance etc (marginalised in NZ performance) departs from the linear modernist convention of transformation from dark to light (as a western framework) and instead suggests a multiplicity of voices, stories, trajectories, sometimes clashing, sometimes paralleling.. definitely questioning... to generate an authentic response in the viewer which is not about spoon feeding them with what they SHOULD think, feel or see. You have been party to such a response yourself, albeit conservative. Whereas Grant says the nudity was no big deal.

Everyone says something different. This is the intention and I know I have succeeded when such a range of views emanate from the work. People who don't come to support the show (your major supporters in this debate so far) see only your review and our dialogue and choose to make comment. This is a multiplicity of perspectives, this is our postmodern world.

If you had noticed, each section/scene/vignette had its own mini-transformation... and sometimes contradicted the last. Other times juxtaposing transformations intersected each other. It has its own well considered craft as Cat has suggested. The stripping of clothes... so multi-faceted evidently in so many capacities (yes the naked female body a loaded symbol of course, I AM aware), and returning of them was not only a reflection and acceptance (its own transformation) of a contradictory postmodern world (which is not black and white), where we can never really escape inscription on the body,  but on any other basic level was also a form of the cyclical patterns of birth, life, death, birth, life, death... and all detail between. This is WHY we returned to our fetishized military rainbow coloured costumes... as well as the fact that it would indeed have been chilly to be nude for another hour. Sometimes, we dancers must be pragmatic as well as spiritual and deep. And humour is transformative. Incase you didn't know that either.

Celine Sumic March 23rd, 2009

I disagree that this is a modernist vs postmodernist issue, and assert that the combined anarchic attitude and 'spiritual' zeal of Artaud and Wilson's approach share strong similarities...

You suggest that the nudity in this work asks
"What is this body I have?" and "What does it mean to be present in this body in our current social, cultural and political climates?"
I disagree - and to quote Grant Buist above "it wasn't really a big deal" and "I couldn't even read the slogan painted on the dancers because of the powerful backlight."

If the stripping of the clothes was intended as you suggest "to transform the body and heal itself of its hegemonic etchings" why then did they put the exact same clothes back on a short time later?

Cat Gwynne March 22nd, 2009

Although promising myself never to respond to theatreview reviews in this way again, I feel that it is now important to raise a key issue in this discussion that may (or perhpas may not who knows) help to clarify things before we end up eating each other alive.

Rather than linking this postmodern dance work to the modernist philosophies of Artaud as the reviewer has done, I think a more suitable contextualization would be to suggest that this piece descends from the choreographic rupture or mainstream-subversion that happened in the contemporary European dance scene in the late 1990's. This path of subversion (led by people such as Jerome Bel, Vera Mantero etc) opened up a new approach to choreography where the body directly became the object/subject of investigation; a body which was recognized as being regimented by social, cultural and political structures of power. (There is a strong argument infact that this new approach to choreography was infact the true beginning of postmodern dance and that the work of the Judsons etc was actually a late eruption of truly modernist ideals). In the case of this particular show, toxicity or toxic shock is used as a metaphor for or a way into a 'New Zealand relevant' critique of the effects of these structures on the body.

Two characteristics of this subvertive choreographic approach, which can be referred to as 'a theorization of embodiment', are a reduction in movement (resembling a particuar tradition in performance art, seen in Alexa's show), and the stripping of the dancing body (also seen in Alexa's show). Choreographers working in this area take a post-structuralist stance and ask: "What is this body I have?" and "What does it mean to be present in this body in our current social, cultural and political climates?" This is exactly what Alexa Wilson sets out to do in her piece Toxic White Elephant Shock.

Although the reviewer superficially states that the dancers were dressed in costumes resembling Sergeant Pepper's Lonely Hearts Club Band, through re-contextualizing the piece in this way I am able to see the militant/patriarchal choice of dress as being a satirical poke at the structures of power the body is forced to negotiate through. I am then able to see the nudity as being a stripping of these inscriptions, a desire to TRANSFORM the body and heal itself of its hegemonic etchings.

I feel this review, although very articulate, is a modernist judgement of a postmodern work, resulting in a misunderstanding of conceptual intentions. And as it does not take into consideration the values of the culture under analysis, it unfortunately renders itself irrelevant.

(Also: As the initiator of, as referred to by Gregory Black, I would just like to say yes it is true we do indeed mutually admire each other, we admire and care for each other very much, and we are sorry we have had a small coverage of the fringe, we have been very busy making stuff).

Tihei, MAURI ORA!!!!!!!!!!


Cat Gwynne

Jack Gray March 22nd, 2009

I don't often like to wade into any online faceless discussions but thought I'd offer some thoughts from an outside perspective as a dance practitioner and sometimes dance reviewer. I did not see the show unfortunately (as I was away in Dunedin) yet was extremely curious to hear feedback from the show, especially as most if not all of the performers are friends of mine. I am also a friend of the reviewer Celine and so asked her privately what she had thought of the show. She did not want to reveal anything as she immersed herself in the writing of her review for the show and told me to check it out once it had been posted. Reading the review, I felt that I had adequately gained a sense of the provocations, ideas, performance elements that I had expected from the show, having seen a few of Alexa's previous works and having had read about them in other forums. Aside from Celine's own personal conclusions-to which reviewers are of course entitled to-I actually found the review fascinating and not at all derogatory to the work or artists themselves. Reviewers differ from viewers in that their response is in part emotive and immediate, yet mostly has to be considered, intellectual and reflective. Without being privy to decisions from within a creative process, they can only draw on and guesstimate from what they know, see, feel, sense and hear-which IS different from person to person. What I personally find more devastating as an artist is a complete lack of awareness on behalf of (some) reviewers and their inability to describe, discuss and analyse what the artist has put out there. Celine however has described many aspects of the work and asked some pertinent questions, which the artists themselves and other members of the community (aside from Dance Community) have engaged with. I agree with Derek that some fantastic work of differing levels of funding, time, maturity and platforms have been shown and expressed during the current festivals-and Alexa's show is one of many examples of the diversity present. I hope that these discussions can be generous, open minded and thoughtful in their manner so that our community can continue to foster and grow... oh, and WORLD PEACE....

Derek March 22nd, 2009

This review and the resultant illuminating discussion raises a couple of issues for me. To what extent should we expect a work to deliver exactly what was advertised? How should we view new works in the context of an arts festival? During this rich feast of arts we have been soaking in for that last few weeks it's important to remember that we're comparing works that have had years of development (tempest, solos) with works that have are new but well funded (White body), and works that have had previous showings and are still developing (Self portrait, Sleep Wake). I think it's worth pondering, individually and personally, where this particular work fits into this milieu. What we are discussing here is a work which is a required outcome of a funded development process. It is a work which has been developed during a short period of residency at Mau forum – itself a transformative and challenging process for the artists. As such it should be viewed as a gift, a snapshot of a creative journey that will result in either more developed versions of this work, or form the foundation of other works. That a new an experimental work stands up so well in comparison to other works in this festival is a testament to the skill of the artists involved. This is a new work, with a short development period – a period not dissimilar to the lead times for producing publicity materials. This leads to a situation where an artist is required to say what a completed work will be about when they are starting to develop it. The process of creation of art is such that the stated intention of the artist during the creative process and the final work may not, and should not be required to, coincide. Simply delivering the work described in the funding application – no matter how deep and profound - should not be considered success – The White Body would be an example of that. What should be important is that an artwork is delivered. If the result is profound, thought provoking, challenging, engaging or entertaining, does it really matter that the content is not exactly the same as original brief? A work of art should be judged in and of itself, not directly against the programme notes - which may have been written by an unrelated party who has never actually seen the work. This is particularly pertinent for new works such as this where the funding proposal/programme notes/discussions with media will have occurred well before the work was completed. TWES is a work that delivered - and we should certainly encourage artists to deliver – even if, perhaps especially if, it’s not what we were expecting. On the separate issue of nudity and spray painting. Is nudity challenging or provocative or confusing in contemporary dance? Firstly I feel constrained to point out that I wasn't at all surprised or shocked that there was nudity in this piece – or indeed any performance piece – this is the 21st century after all. Which isn’t to say a naked body is a valueless performance decision – it clearly has weight – otherwise it wouldn’t even be an issue here. As with any other artistic decision the underlying question is, did this particular provocation make sense within the work? Spraying toxic paint and toxic words, which resolved through transposition to a toxic pun on naked vulnerable human flesh in a piece called toxic…shock? Regardless of whether one liked it or not, it made complete sense within the work and did so on many levels. So props to Alexa and the dancers for non-gratuitous and completely justifiable use of nudity in a contemporary art work.

Celine Sumic March 21st, 2009

Hey Alana..

Thanks for the offer to 'Sick Disco', sounds great and while I'm sure you could "open my eyes," etc, just so you (and the rest of the theatreviewing population) know, I'm strictly heterosexual.

To clarify some of the misunderstandings above:
I was "watching carefully" ...  In fact I didn't take my eyes off the work (having the joyful job of reviewing it), and while I agree that some parts of the work were amusing, I did not find this work "provocative", "challenging" or "confusing."  

In terms of the content and theme, I found it delivered something quite other from what the artist speaks of in the program and I think that is interesting in itself.

In terms of spray painting "SICK KUNTZ" on the dancers bodies, I consider it abusive, not artistic, clever or funny...

Alana Yee March 21st, 2009

I love my body, and when the suggestion was made in the process that we could possibly get our kit off for the show I was super excited. To celebrate our beautiful expressive forms within such an important performance piece seemed such an awesome opportunity. Please note 'could', the nudity was always an option of choice, we have brains and the process was collaborative. In reference to the tagging of our naked bodies section, what better canvas to use than our collective voices in the form of our proud exposed skins with nothing to hide behind our statement. We are all artists and poets who have things to say. In fact, we came up with the word play ourselves. And I'd like to emphasise that word 'play'. We also all happen to have a great sense of humour, the layers of irony and ambiguity were all part of the provocation. A bit of a poke to ourselves and the audience to communicate our ideas of dark undertones is pretty clever really. I'm sure I heard a few laughs in this section too which tells me people got it on all sorts of levels. Uncomfortable or amused, we got a reaction and people were stimulated. We are a strong bunch of women and know ourselves well. If we didn't want to subject ourselves to being nude and painted with art wouldn't have been in the show. It's as simple as that. If you didn't get the double meanings in the words written then maybe you need to do some more research or just get with the times! Alexa's work is 'sick az!' and I think we could  with more awesome 'kunst' in 'NZ'. Anyone who couldn't see the style and flair in the work could probably do with a personality make over and get some style and flair themselves. If you can't appreciate intelligent colour, wonderful wizardry and relevant commentary reflective of our times in 2009, then maybe just stay at home and watch tv, you'll feeler safer. This is a work of our generation, it's made now. If you can't work out the references then OPEN your eyes! May I suggest coming down to Sick Disco at Cassette #9, a good old dance bombing might do you some good.
And concluding my personal experience as a dancer from TWES, I'd like to point out that I had heaps of fun. Some of the conceptual content we work shopped with may have been dark but at the end of the day we have to find the lighter of side of things, otherwise how do we heal and move forward? I would have written this earlier but you know, I have WAY better things to do in my life than sit on this website all day everyday, and quoting on Alexa's line from the show...."LET'S PARTAY!!!"

lots of aroha und besos,
Alana Yee xx

Grant Buist March 21st, 2009

Speaking as an audience member who knows a bit about theatre but not much about dance: - Yes, it was a long performance (closer to 90 min than 2 hours?) but in no way did it feel like a "haul". Like a Cornetto, it had no boring bits. - The nudity wasn't really a big deal. I couldn't even read the slogan painted on the dancers because of the powerful backlight. If you were to ask the dancers about this experience, they would probably say it was "a bit chilly". - There were many moments of humour to leaven the bleakness, for example the nude interview/massage sequence, Georgie's fake hissy fit as the "poster girl" and (wedding?) photos of Alexa with a large cardboard box - complete with a similarly-boxed wedding party. - Charlotte and Matt's soundscapes were indeed excellent, and contributed much to the "Lynchian" feel of the performance as noted. -TWES would kill in Wellington. Give it a week in BATS, ker-ching!

Celine Sumic March 21st, 2009

I didn't see style or flair in this work - but it's important to have a range of opinions on theatreview. 
I hope I haven't wasted my time in asking the question about the spray painting of the dancer's naked bodies in this work...
I'm still interested in the question - what value, the naked body - particularly the female naked body? 
And I'm interested in what was the personal experiences of the dancers that were spray painted in this work?

shortee March 21st, 2009

I thought Miss Wilson's show was incredibly bold and intelligent.  I thought it was one of the most challenging dance/theatre pieces I have seen in years and that it competed with such large scale works as Black Milk by Douglas Wright.  Your review shows me exactly just how brave and challenging Alexa's piece was as its obvious how much it confused you.  What did you expect to see and what did you want to see, and what did you resist seeing?  It's so easy for people to immediately jump on the defense when presented with a challenge to the way we perceive "dance" should be. It's no wonder then that you seem to have used every obscure reference you can in order to assert your intelligence over a piece that simply seems to have eluded you in terms of its complete daring, and colour and depth. 

I don't need to read about Artaud in reviews, it makes me feel that the reviewer is less interested in talking about the work with people who may or may not have seen it and more interested in proving to us that they are smarty pants. 

As for your "deep, philosophical question" regarding nudity....why would waste your time trying to discuss about a work that so clearly had put great thought into it?  Why not save your attack/discussion for those who use in an obviously exploitative way?  I thought the nudity expressed in this piece was at once brave and strong yet supple and vulnerable.  Which made me feel as though I was watching the work of someone who valued her audience members so much that she was not only confronting them with her ideas on the world, but allowing them to see her softest and most intimate feelings towards those ideas.  If all you came away with from this piece was a question around nudity, you really weren't watching very carefully.

I sincerely think that New Zealand is lucky to have a choreographer who is so willing to completely challenge her audience with such style and flair. 

Jennifer Poyema March 20th, 2009

"Dance Community" - I am a member of the Dance Community.  I did not write the comment posted from the Dance Community. I resist being spoken for and a statement being made that suggests I had a part in writing it. I find the review intelligent and useful.
Regards, JDL

Gregory Black March 20th, 2009

That was extremely clever of the Auckland dance community to find its collective voice in such a short time! Or could it be that this voice belongs to those who have set up (with Ms Wilson herself a major contributor)?  It’s well named given the content so far, but so far it reads more like a mutual admiration society than a site for reviews from people who “know what they are talking about”.  

And the way they talk, is that a true voice or some phoney ‘street kulcha’ pose? Just asking. And given their apparent intentions to review all the Fringe and there’s nothing more recent than 7 March … I’m thinking the actual dance community is probably quite pleased that Theatreview has been so diligent with its coverage.  

Getting back to the show in question, the title intrigues me … What’s it mean? How is it related to the actual work?

As for the nudity question: maybe the dancers can share their thoughts on this aspect …?

Celine Sumic March 20th, 2009

My review is veiling nothing - but thanks for reading more depth into it than intended, Alexa /Artaud.

alexa wilson March 20th, 2009

Thanks Dance Community. And curious Celine/Rebecca how your review directly conflicts with every other audience person's feedback so far... 50-100 people have said to me alone the exact opposite, so once I again, I question your motives for this review. Very thinly veiled I think. But thankyou for such and aggressive review... the work clearly affected you.

Dance Community March 20th, 2009

Can we please have our major dance works reviewed by people who actually know what they are talking about.

Kind Regards,

D. Community

Make a comment

Wellingon City Council
Aotearoa Gaming Trust
Creative NZ
Auckland City Council