DO YOU BELIEVE DANCE IS INNATE?
IS SELECTION HEALTHY?
WHAT COULD SELECTION ALSO REPRESENT? IN A WORLD OF MULTIPLICITY are we shutting out possibility and potential through rigid selection based on a set of rules? Who makes up the rules and who believes them?
OUR BODIES ARE LIVING, BREATHING SPONGES!
How much do we retain? Is this only possible through repetition? Can we only draw on movement years later that has been ingrained. Is this a form of 'brain-washing' with the body? What could be the benefits as well as the dangers?
Please can you blog back an example from your own experience of a certain set of codes that have been created for a dance style and by who - what you think their reasons were?
Does repetition, routine fit the purpose for creative people? Can too much drill result in crushing creativity or support certainty and are the instincts the body learns our own?
Would love to hear your thoughts on this.
to the selection process it depends on what you desired outcomes would be. If you would like a dancer that fits what the Russians want (I am using Classical dance as my example) then you must work towards their laid out guidelines that you would find by training with the Russians, and the authorities are those individuals directing the companies and schools. If you would like to train a dancer using Balanchine's ideas then you must adhere to the guidelines laid out by the school of American ballet, and the New York City Ballet.
ReplyDeleteFor dance in general, and as a teacher, what do you see a student to be capable of? in the readings I have come across there is much mentioning of developing the "eye" for dancers. I think this is related to visionaries and the ability to visualize potential before the training begins. It is mentioned that this skill comes with experience, and practice.
I also feel as though repetition is important for creative people as much as it is for less creative people. I have been told by many that I am extremely creative (according to others not myself, except I feel like a squirrel that has rank a can of redbull) and I feel that each time I repeat something like a class, or choreography or some other form of repetitive activity I find ways to make it better. I can slightly change the arm here or there, or the head, or what my thoughts are, and I am finding that even though I am "doing the same thing" I really am using enhancing what I am doing using my creative skills. However, if you do the same thing over and over and do not make any changes within what you are doing, isn't it a little like "punching knives"? a useless painful endeavor with no possible development in outcomes?
The 'eye' from which visionary? Autonomy comes from working for yourself, not at the instruction of another. A name or title should not give them the right to objectify people and insist on their passive agreement. Is there humanity without anarchy? Is there only one 'eye'? What gives us the right to assume we know? Diverse dance companies and their successful dancers don't always fit to another's 'eye'.
DeleteI'd like to hear your definition of innate... but I was just at a contact improv jam yesterday (for the first time in a while--so nice to be back). It was great hearing how a lot of the students who take contact improv at this particular university are not dancers. That's one of the reasons why I like contact improv, is it's relatively non-codified and user-friendly for those new to dance. You don't need much to get going at all, no technique, so to speak, just explorative tools in your toolbox. I get a lot of people saying to me, "Oh, I could never dance," when the reality is they almost certainly could if they tried (and may already have done without recognizing it). They just have this mental picture of dance = professional ballet instead of it being the big broad world that it is.
ReplyDeleteHonestly every one of your questions could be a book so I'll just limit myself to saying I think we all need a mix of repetition and creativity, depending on our personalities and the circumstances... repetition can also force creativity, IMO.
Hi Jane,
ReplyDeleteI like your expression about "brain-washing" your body. I think we are brainwashed, when we believe that the "truth", that we were brainwashed with is the only truth there is. It leaves no option, for other point of views. I think this would represent for me some of the dangers, when working with/within strictly codified systems (as i.e.Ballet or some modern dance techniques): perceiving the codes as the only truth or absolute. But I think when you are aware, that these are codes, made up by somebody, in a certain context, to serve a certain purpose, this awareness allows freedom of choice, you can choose to follow the codes, but you can also question them or alter them, you can reflect and and think about your experience within that system, what serves you and what does not. In the end its not about the system itself, but about what you make out of your experience with that system.
What I observe sometimes in class, that some people are so busy trying to be "correct"/adhering to the codes perfectly, that the movement gets lost in the process, trying to squeeze themselves into shapes. I think especially with children and beginners its so important (in my eyes anyway), that they experience the movement, get a kinaesthetic experience or sense of what jumping, turning, sliding, melting etc is and can be, there are so many ways you can experience for example turning, before they try to "shape" those jumps and turns in certain way.
Maybe being able to navigate or move within a codified system, can add to your spectrum of Movement you can draw from it, use it in creative way, as long as you are also able to leave that system if you wish and use another approach to your movement? Its an interesting topic and lends itself for endless discussions I think ;-)
Hi Agata. If we follow set codes and rules then some children will take this as the one truth. Young children tend to form their identities on those around them and if expected to meet an 'absolute ideal' which comes with praise when they do through the exam system, they will embody this one truth. Of course, discipline can be anarchic. My classes assist children who struggle to think creatively, to re-order or reshape and seem to need certainty, repetition and a fixed instruction. Our teaching approaches should meet the individual, our skill comes when knowing how much or how little to assist. Even in the dance profession there will be dancers who passively meet the needs of another and those who can create their own work. Is the business dependent on the former to provide the autonomy for the later? Does this come at the price of objectifying yourself in the face of others? I think there are real ethical implications here. This feels very close to the master/slave philosophy. In retaliation to the Russians, I have just watched a film on the selection process for children, and it is hard, cruel and resembles a national idealism which makes your skin crawl. I guess it comes down to your own principals when choosing your approach. I look at the reasons why a person would need to use children in this way and the long-term effects if has on their mental health. How can we build communities and excellence while not missing what is really important? Getting back to Adesola's post on Darwin, it is the categorizing and labeling, comparisons of groups and ranking of them that produced a colonial mindset, but this was born from people passively conforming to another's set of rules. I believe there can be no humanity without anarchy!! It is those that fight back that bring about change. Ghandi 'resisted' without fighting, passively. Perhaps there is room for 'Survival of the Kindness', I hope so.
Delete