theory into practice
generally dance uses the term «practice as research» for the practical application (or exploration) of dance scholarship. i favour «theorising through practice» as a both a description and mode of inquiry (after marysia zalewski).
for me the crux is that doing something involves having a concept of what you are doing. to understand and explore the practice, one must understand the theory. even if the theory is your own, and as yet undefined.
you can’t say « dance comes before theory because the body has physical wisdom » without recognising that you are articulating concepts and theories, not movement. thinking and doing go hand in hand. but as soon as you act with intention, theory comes first.
whether we recognise it or not, we all make work according to a set of principles, and processes. if we accept practice as research (par), then par scholarship should be the identification and sharing of the principles as well as their aesthetic celebration. the (potential) richness of the arts is self evident, it seems redundant for par to center on the subjective and experiential.
with somatics and post-positivism shifting dance away from physical and mental rigour you would have thought par would be used to find new teaching strategies. but if par offers nothing but subjective, idiosyncratic insight, what is there to teach?
teaching requires teaching both practice and theory, and as such offers more experiential, and conceptual truths / findings than par. a teacher who can articulate their practice, and do so in a manner that allows students to comprehend and find their own practice understands their form.
research is about more than the individual researcher, it is about the area as a whole, praxis and practitioners. those who can’t teach, do. those who can’t do, conceptualise. teachers recall the past, maintain the present and facilitate the future.
teach yourself, then share with others … that is practice as research.
blog comments powered by Disqus