Christian Rizzo: “Choreography Isn’t Just for Choreographers”

Wilson Le Personnic

As cultural institutions face the constant pressure of successive political, cultural and economical crises, Christian Rizzo reflects on his ten years at the helm of the Montpellier Centre Chorégraphique National (CCN)—a decade during which he redefined the role of the institution, broadened the definitions of what constitutes dance, and upheld a strong aesthetic ethos in a changing world.

What will you retain from these past ten years?

Christian Rizzo: Becoming the director of a Centre chorégraphique national was a massive change for someone like me, coming from a career as a choreographer within a company. I arrived with a written plan, but that plan only came alive once I began to implement it. From the start, I wanted the CCN— which I renamed ICI (Institut Chorégraphique International), meaning “here” in French—to be a place where things are challenged and interrogated rather than simply asserted. The project was structured around a founding question: what is choreography, and where does choreographic art reside? I chose to consider choreographic art in a broader way, without hierarchizing forms and knowledge, and by creating bridges between artists, audiences, and local communities. These ten years have only further convinced me that we need to think about knowledge in a horizontal way, and give each and every person access to choreographic reflection, whatever their starting point is.  

According to you, how has the choreographic landscape evolved?

C.R.: I don’t know if it has evolved or if it is just constantly changing. What I’ve noticed is that things are increasingly polarized: on the one hand, there are larger-scale projects that bring together a lot of people; on the other, smaller, more experimental and often marginal ones, which are nonetheless powerful both politically and aesthetically. Current social issues have influenced our practice, and this in turn has created a need for spectacular and fluid forms. We’ve had more proposals than ever, which sometimes leads to less legibility. When so many projects are being brought to us, it becomes necessary to slow down and take the time to evaluate. What I wanted to do at the CCN was to welcome these changes and remain permeable to them, without ever compromising the structure of the project. That has meant opening new spaces, making other voices heard, circulating a variety of aesthetics without hierarchizing them. Being open to the world, yes—but without ever losing touch with what we are looking for.  

Is the CCN format still relevant for today’s creative practices and their reality? 

C.R.: Rather than question the relevance of the CCN format, I think the real question is whether these institutions have the means to tackle the complexity of the choreographic field today. Each CCN has the same basic missions, but it is the singularity of each leadership team that brings life to them. What I did in Montpellier addressed current stakes: we need to support new artists and allow them to continue creating works, remain open to varied projects, and foster conversations between local communities, aesthetics, and social issues. However, to fully realize my vision, I had to mobilize significant resources from my own tours to finance programming, exhibitions, residencies, and practical workshops. This really raises the bigger question of what financial means we have at our disposal to realize ambitious projects. It’s not just about money, but also coherence. If CCNs are expected to accomplish so much, they need adequate support—or expectations must be adjusted to the reality of what’s actually available. 

Shared leadership is becoming more common, as in Rennes, Marseille, Grenoble, Orléans and soon, Montpellier. Do you think this model is better suited to the various tasks these institutions are expected to accomplish? 

C.R.: Shared leadership is not new in CCNs: they have always been led by a “ticket”, even if only one name appeared in official communication. There has always been a “vice-director”, a team with whom all decisions were shared. What is new, however, is that this is now explicitly acknowledged. I don’t know whether this is a political choice or a response to the exhaustion of the single-leader model. It probably does lighten the symbolic load for the one official director, but in reality, directing such a structure has always relied on teamwork. For me, leadership is not about “imposing a direction”; it’s about giving directions. It’s less a matter of how many people are giving directions, and more about what those directions will allow us to build together over time.  

How do you think the CCNs will fare in the context of the current crises? 

C.R.: The future of CCNs will depend above all on the type of projects they host and support. An institution is nothing without forward-looking, living projects. It is the ideas, the artists, and the dynamics they create that give meaning to institutions. But we must have the means to support them. How can we demand ambitious projects and results if we do not provide the necessary conditions for artists to thrive? I’ve too often seen ambitious projects selected but given inadequate resources, leading to exhaustion or empty shells. For such institutions to remain alive, projects, resources, and political direction have to be aligned. It’s a matter of shared responsibility for me: public institutions must take ownership of their decisions and commit to them. You cannot pay lip service to cultural policy while undermining its very means of existence. The risk is ending up with cultural institutions with no art in them. In recent months, schools have closed, budgets have been cut, venues have been unable to program. The question goes beyond the scope of CCNs: what is at stake is the place of the arts within cultural policy.  

During your ten years at the helm of the CCN, you met a whole generation of emerging artists. How have young choreographers’ concerns evolved? 

C.R.: In recent years, I’ve seen a generation of artists emerge who are profoundly marked by political concerns. Some have been able to channel this into a unique choreographic identity, while others have sometimes allowed these issues overwhelm them, to the detriment of their art itself. exerce is now the only MA program in France dedicated specifically to choreographic research. We have created a safe space for researching and experimenting. Artists from difficult backgrounds—some from war zones, others from places where they cannot create freely for political or cultural reasons—have found here the possibility to work and to express themselves. For me, what was at stake was to foster the emergence and articulation of choreographic thought, and to cultivate conversations around it. That is the mission of a dance institution, and it’s what we must continue to defend. 

You were one of the first choreographers to come from a visual arts background (fashion, music), a transversal approach that has now become common among younger artists. What is your take on the growing importance of interdisciplinarity within CCNs?

C.R.: The past few years have confirmed that choreography is not the exclusive domain of choreographers. Visual artists, people working with sound or performance—many of them explore movement, space, the gaze, which is in itself very choreographic. On the one hand, pluridisciplinary and post-disciplinary forms continue to exist and keep being (re)invented. On the other, some projects are strongly anchored in one particular discipline, whether dance, music, or the visual arts. For me, this tension can be fruitful. It is one of the major stakes: broadening the meaning of choreographic gestures without diluting the concept. These are hybrid forms, sometimes undisciplined, and the CCNs need to be able to welcome them, because they interrogate what choreography can mean today. It’s not about broadening the field for the sake of it, but about recognizing that today, dance can be expressed through different media and languages. This shift may be demanding, but it is necessary if we want to stay in touch with the present moment. 

Wilson Le Personnic is a freelance writer and art worker. He collaborates with choreographic artists by supporting their creative processes or documenting their work. He also contributes writing to media outlets, cultural institutions and artistic projects, producing critical, editorial, and educational texts.

à l’ombre d’un vaste détail, hors tempête.
Choreography: Christian Rizzo
From 6 to 9 Novembre 
at MC93
as a part of plan D

à l’ombre d’un vaste détail, hors tempête.
Choreography: Christian Rizzo
From 13 to 15 Novembre
at Théâtre National de Bretagne, Rennes

Quelque chose suit son cours…
Christian Rizzo
Une année d’entretiens avec Marie-Thérèse Champesme
Editions CND, 2010
More information

Association des centres chorégraphiques nationaux (ACCN)
More information