product or packaging
doug has been blogging about the «does dance have a future» meeting which ask the question:
how is technology impacting the dance world. is it good? is it bad? how can we use it to grow our audiences? how does live dance compete?
kristin asks «what engages you?». both are mainly addressing the issue of attracting (and retaining?) audiences. both assumes that dance is generally watchable.
most of my peers and friends in the dance sector think that the quality of danceworks (in general) is poor. there is plenty to engage with when you are new to dance, but the quality quickly trails off.
it is all well and good trying to get people into the theaters (or other spaces) to watch dance, but how do wee keep them coming back. how sure are we that they will enjoy what they see.
i’m not suggesting that dance has a greater percentage of bad works than any other form. but that, well … at least if an art gallery show is bad you can just walk out. and it is easy to wander in and look too.
the future of dance (arts) is dependent on its quality. live dance will always be around in some form or other, even if just the preserve of a few die hards.
the internet is just a form of communication, technologies have always existed alongside dance. if dance feels marginalised, then perhaps it is because it lacks something in itself. people still consume art, and will continue to do so. the ease of sharing self-made art has lead to the impression that we have moved from a consuming to a creating culture.
it is interesting to see an attempt to address marketing dance through (internet) technologies. dance is struggling to communicate amongst itself with such tools. if the screendance or dance and performance technologies communities can’t get their house in order, what hope for the rest of the sector? [1]
surely the question should be: « how can we use the internet and its various platforms & media to improve dance praxis? ». then, when we have something of consistent quality and interest think about how and what we try to market
.dance already sells itself. kristin’s ipod ad is a perfect example. how often do you see images of dance used to promote non dance things? dance, or at the the notion of it is already attractive. all we need to do is make the product exceed the conceptual expectation.
[1] i’m referring to the lack of a strong online presence of the forms, even though they are well suited to internet based presentation.