If you partake in the international dance community, I am sure you have read by now the malintent response Marco Goecke gave critic Wiebke Hüster by smothering his dog’s shit on her face; this year’s international dance community scandal equivalent to Will Smith slapping Chris Rock in the 2022 Oscars. And unlike other publications covering this incident using words like excrement and feces, to not pull any punches, it is shit.
Goecke received a review from Hüster, a critic and journalist for the Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung, that Goecke deemed undeserving for his work titled “In the Dutch Mountains” which was presented and performed by Netherlands Dance Theater (NDT) last week, premiering 2/9/23. Hüster wrote that Goecke’s work was “disjointed” and “boring.” Goecke released a public statement on NDT’s site following the dog-shit-smearing assault and defends himself by accusing Hüster of shunning audiences away from attending the theater and that Hüster had been ‘out to get him’ for some time. This shallowly apologetic response is full of boo-hoo-me comments and did not help his case in this scenario. What was he or his publicist thinking with the strategy for this one? Please read for yourself on NDT’s site.
“In the Dutch Mountains” is Goecke’s first evening-length work for NDT, where he has been a collaborator and creator since 2008. In 2013, he was promoted to Assistant Choreographer and his contract is up for renewal in 2023 for another 4 years.
As a fellow choreographer, creator, and dancer, my reaction to this incident is not completely unexpected. Dance History has a lineage of dramatic encounters and responses; the classic glass-in-pointe shoes for the lead role thing kind of thing. Artists are tender towards their creations and the act of sharing their obsession with the world is vulnerable. However, we should not be sympathizing with Goecke, as many artists do this daily. Instead, let’s uplift the heroic acts of Hüster as she stands up for her review and takes dog shit in the face to prove her dedication. She, and many other critics, sole jobs are to question the creations of highly funded artists and organizations. Hüster upholds a tradition and creative cultivation that critique is needed in a creative process for artists and she is here to ask and say the hard questions, especially those of large international platforms like NDT. An artist SHOULD respond to this public critique as a conversation or playful banter and respond in multiple ways such as adjusting the choreography, writing a response, or simply ignoring it. Instead, Goecke has chosen a violent, predetermined, and passionate act that will only overshadow his choreographic career from here on out. The stage space and his premiere is another think-tank for receiving critique, and it is part of the job, particularly of an artist of this caliber. To other fellow artists who are not being written about by critics from the Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung or New York Times, I share this casual reminder; to be written about is a compliment and, simply, free publicity. The irony of this public altercation is that I too find myself curious to see “In the Dutch Mountains” just to see if Hüster was right in her conclusion.
Goecke submits to Hüster by subliminally saying with his physical response that Hüster holds power over him and the success of his piece, which is not the case. Shoving dog shit in her face validates this submission to her words and reminds me of the power language holds.
Dance needs individuals like Hüster to question what is happening in this field. In general, choreographers should be asked to defend their work on a regular basis for the benefit of themselves and the communities they represent. As artists, we should defend ourselves in manners that are not perpetuating violence in a field that already has suffered a history of sexual assault, glass-in-pointe shoes, and now the smearing of dog shit.
In terms of reparations, Hanover’s Opera House has ended its collaboration with Goecke while NDT has sided with the creator by allowing his work to be continually performed and is still under contract as their Assistant Choreographer. I challenge NDT by asking them if they want to harbor an impulsive individual who could possibly treat a dancer in a similar manner and where are the repercussions for these self-indulgent, defensive actions? Are artists recessing back to glass-in-pointe shoe guerrilla tactics as defensive strategies?
