quodlibet

interrupt

comments

post positivist and no problems

i’ve been thinking about a list of unsolved problems in ‘dance’. but so much of our theory and practice (praxis) is undefined, the ‘problems’ become unwieldily. complexity aside my list would include:

• what is dance & performance technologies?
• what is screendance?
• what is contemporary dance?
• what is bodily knowledge?

the ‘solve’ would require a general consensus and ‘proof’. in each case, the broader questions should also be answered. e.g., where is bodily knowledge located, how is it acquired, is it inductive/deductive (or something else). apart from defining screendance (in general), what are the subsets/genres.

i’d like to see a large, multi-day conference that attempted to reach a majority consensus on one of these problems.

- having a few problem with comments, so adding doug’s comments directly:

Matt, I think this is academic version of my complaint that nobody has really explored how to write about dance, movement and the body for the general public. Many dance companies work on assumption that dance critics are the ultimate authority. But dance reviewers represent only a small sliver of how one can go about communicating information about dance.

Outside of dance world, nobody has a clue what an embodied experience is — except if it has to do with being abducted by a martian.

It doesn’t really seem that there is much interest in addressing basic questions and challenges related to dance.

comments

liters per minute

further thoughts on student log-books/documentation:

i would like (expect) 450 words of critical reflection per week from students. 150 in response to a quote, 200 of general refection (thoughts, review of show, etc.), and 100 (minimum) of concise lesson notes.

students would also need to document two or three ‘artifacts of interest’ (image, video, audio), give a bibliography of their reading (or performance/gallery attendance), and ensure all items documented are properly referenced.

this is intentionally prescriptive and aimed at year one and two undergraduates. the purpose is to develop a habit of logging/referencing their research, thoughts and practice. in the first two years of study i want to offer methods that ‘work’ so they can master key skills. in the third year we can give them more freedom, knowing they have a ‘solid’ approach to fall back on.

these number are per module, not a ‘course’ level recommendation. if students start writing essays in ‘good time’ the could be writing 1200+ words a week. they also have to put in creative/artistic studio time, technique practice, and performances. i also think students should make work in their own time, that has nothing to do with the course per se. this is the place should scratch their artistic itches, modules (usually) have more specific aims and objectives.

comments

matriculating mannequins

recently, a debate on ‘core texts’ started at an old workplace. the intention was to setup a ‘one stop shop’ at the front of the library.

the idea was well intended (to make the library more accessible/interesting to students), but deeply flawed.

students lack research skills, collecting the texts in one location stops them learning how to ‘browse’ for information. if core texts must be co-located, place them at the back of the library (force them to wander). also, students should be buying core texts for themselves.

the actual concept of ‘core texts’ was also questioned; is there such a thing? my reading lists are designed to develop, and contextualise the core principles i teach. we shouldn’t depend on books, and their absent authors, to ‘educate’ our students.

books offer additional perspectives, examples, and reference points. make them ‘bibles’, and students will never look beyond the page(s). i recommend books as points of interest, never something to ‘get’. discourse is active, not a passive, fixed set of interpretations.

for example, i offer first year (undergraduate) improv students «you are here: personal geographies and other maps of the imagination» by katherine harmon (2004). i consider cartography (mapmaking) and navigation, key composition skills. harmon’s text offers a multitude of maps for different purposes.

students reading is often ‘limited’ (obvious) and subject specific; so i wouldn’t (initially) recommend «traces of dance: choreographers’ drawings and notations» by valerie preston-dunlop et al (1994). for the more capable student i might suggest «notations» by john cage and alison knowles (1969). this text is also useful for applications of graphical notation and interpreting/perfroming graphical scores.

if you have something to ‘tell’, say it yourself. if you have somethings to ‘share’, show/tell and offer texts. students should be able to find the ‘readers’ and ‘k.i.s.s.’ books through your teaching, and their own learning/research. if you have to point them out, you’re (probably) doing something wrong.

if your ‘core texts’ are reference texts (e.g. advanced labanotation) then they should be on a reading list. but few dance modules deal with such fundamental content.

comments

szymon mów

Perhaps it is part and parcel of blogging that each new post does not necessarily bear a close relationship with its predecessor. But, when viewed together they are able to take on a ‘life of their own’ (even if merely a cloud). - simon ellis

sheila’s presentation put forward the idea that ‘new wave’ dance blogs are artifact and art. as an outcome of ongoing engagement, the ‘whole’ blog will always carry more significance that each part. that’s not to say each post can’t make sense by itself, but an accumulation of posts provides more context(s).

the person/s writing a blog provide tethered continuity; e.g. quodlibet is a slim slice of my interests, practice/products and ‘self’. authorship is not ‘static’, so whilst the clouds maintain a (shifting) boundary, they also drift.

the idea of drifting contexts can be off-putting. it takes confidence to trust your own interpretation, especially when the focus of engagement changes over time. but attending to (and sharing) the current moment is a compelling feature of the new wave. finding the pieces of a puzzle, helps you see how they ‘fit’, and the overall picture.

doug and simon are right. floating clouds are difficult to place, yet the best we can hope for. explaining your concept/inspiration, or providing a concrete context whist developing work, is incredibly hard. the author must be clear about what they do, and do not understand. sometimes offering no context, is better than confusing the the reader.

discourse is a two way process, listening to the experience of the participants helps us improve it. both author and reader have to work at creating/interpreting, meanings and contexts. we need to work harder to achieve this balance.

comments