One of the most harmful phenomenas in the dance world, yet rather a very common one, is individuals who think their own specific way of moving should be turned into a generic technique, and be thought/imposed  as such to dancers. The damages, both physical and mental of this prevailing way of thinking about dance, are immeasurable. 

ImImitation offers a very limited space for learning, and it’s a sure way to stifle any form of creativity in students/dancers. 

The worrying fact most dancers are attracted to those kind of ‘tchniques’, has more to do with the general education system than dance in particular. ’

Paraphrasing Oscar Wild - Conversation (choreography) should touch everything, but should concentrate itself on nothing.


Movement at its most coherent state, is usually a means to something rather than the aim. In service of, rather than the subject matter.

Running makes full physical sense when chasing, racing or running away from.

Choreography should provide dancers with immediate, clear, urgent, sensible, evident reasons to move. It should free them from the need to pretend, or come up with artificial motivations for the movements they are doing. Movement for movement sake is where dancing becomes self indulgent, muted, futile. It’s where choreography comes to a still point, stagnates and turns abusive. 


 The more a choreography tends to be permanent, the more it tends to be lifeless.


The way I see it, choreography is simply the act of creating a frame which enables the generation, or rather the emergence, of meaning. 


Musicality, is by far the most revealing aspect of dancing, dance and choreography


Changing ones mind, about everything, is an indispensable part of the artistic process. In a way, it is what learning and creating are made of. A long série of new realizations, altered perceptions, letting go of old convictions and the welcoming of new ones. The artistic process is somehow more about these constant shifts, than it is about establishing permanent truths. It is linked to the fact that the artistic process is an on going questioning act, rather than one aimed at finding answers.

What ‘works’ at any given moment, is dynamic, elusive and ever changing, deeply influenced by the context the work is being made in, and if one isn’t able to change his mind in relations to that simple question, what actually ‘works’?, the artistic process will stagnate and eventually die.


The quality of a choreographic work, or any work of art for that matter, can’t be solely examined in relations to one specific piece. It has to be viewed in close link with one fundamental question - does the work bares potential for a future development of an original and effective artistic process?

Some pieces, when examined separately from their potential to produce that coherent future process, might be considered as good work, but if they lack the ability to generate and be part of a larger, genuine process, they remain no more than punctual anecdotes. Lucky artistic strikes.


Choreography, just like Lego, is about assembling things, not really the things themselves. the entire point is the house/car/spaceship/tree you’re  building, not the blocks.

The blocks though, have to be well thought of in order to allow the aesmblage process to happen.

if you’re a choreographer, you should be concerned with making pasta, not growing tomatoes or pressing olive oil! 



I don't creat pieces, I create an ever evolving choreographic system. The separate works, are therefore momentary glimpses at specific points along the evolution of that system. 


structures before effects, systems before content. The first are creative forces, the second, byproducts. 

Body painting by Yifat Gat


Choreography isn’t about the creation of content, it’s rather the process of creatively organizing content. What this content might be,, how it was generated, or where it comes from, are all secondary questions. 


A collective mind will always be more creative than a single one. The process of putting together that creative collective though, can only be effective if it’s the fruit of the vision and guidance of a single mind. Synergies require guidelines. Collectives need leaders, to both assemble, and direct them. 


It doesn’t matter what you do, it’s HOW you do it that makes it valuable art. 


The dancers you choose to work with, are the ones best placed to evaluate the quality of the work you make. 


The highest form of technique one can expect from dancers, is acute mindfulness, clear presence and an extreme attentiveness to both intentions and actions.

All the rest, is a byproduct. 


Not every dancer should be a choreographer, but every dancer has to be able to choreograph.  


Every choreography should contain clear traces of Beauty, rhythm, authority and truth.  


The most accurate guidance one can find during the choreographic process, stems from the unfolding choreography itself.  


Making things personal, is the gateway to choreographic efficiency.