This relates to part of my inquiry I am currently exploring. When researching into what Dance means to my specific community at Ludus Dance, one of the questions provoking very interesting responses is asking to what extent does someone become a dancer? It is a case of their movements being very natural, therefor they are naturally a 'dancer', or are they a 'dancer' because they have a combination of secure technique, knowledge of steps and repotoire, and the ability to listen and move to music ryhmically?! Or is it a combination of both elements?
My latest interview respondant raised an interesting arugment to this question, she commented that in the ideal world, she could whole heartedly say a dancer is
'anyone willing to move and explore their body, creating and expressing emotion or messages through movemet'
Her thoughts on when someone becomes a dancer were
'as soon as they move the body to explore and express communicating a message'
We both agreed however, that being a 'dancer' is still a very broad term, and that although everyone has the ability to a degree, the definition of a 'dancer' must have to change somewhat as a dancer dancing for enjoyment, to a dancer needing to use dance to create a sustainable financial income.
Exploring this a little further, I produced a simple table consrtucted of both her and my ideas of how having to earn money from dance as a professional careea may alter the meaning of being a 'dancer'.
Dance for Enjoyment | Professional Dancer |
- Movement, use of the body - Discovery of new steps/new skills - Development of skills e.g. co-ordination - Feeling free to move in a way that stimulates feeling good - Being creative - movements, choreography - Not afraid to explore ‘creativity’ - Exploring how the body moves/works - Use of the body as an expressive vehicle - Communication of emotion, a message, feeling - Experiencing the pleasure of moving to music - Not restricted to technical boundaries - Sometimes oblivious to movements aesthetic appeal - Movements performed for oneself personal benefit - Movements possibly performed for an audience | - Extensive professional training - Professional experience - Solid technical ability - Ability to perform to required standard for long periods of time - Evidence of professional artist development - Knowledge of the discipline – syllabus, repertoire - Ability to create new choreography - Passionately performing other peoples choreography - Professional dancer ‘status’ – exams, medals, qualifications etc. - Performing to meet standards to employees - Level of expectancy for paying audience |
The more interviews I intend to conduct, the more interesting it will be to see how this table may need to be added too or altered perhaps.....Does anyone have any thoughts on it so far?
Does the meaning of Dance change according to the situation they are involved with it in?
A final thought, how many times have we experienced watching a performance but been intently stuck on one particular dancer? Your opinion may differ from the next audience member, and we cannot exacly pin oint why exactly our eye is drawn to them. When we say they have a 'natural girf', what do we actually mean? Does it even matter?
In todays boom in dance media competitions and events, should there be some common ground?
Please feel free to share any thoughs, I'd really love to develop this element of my project, so any ideas of thoughts you wish to share would be really helpful!
2 comments:
If you have not already read this, it may interest you: Session 2 'What makes movements art?' from the report of Mind, body and performance symposium (Sadler's Wells Theatre 2006) may interest you(Please see the page bottom of the following).
http://www.danceuk.org/healthier-dancer-programme/health-related-events-and-conferences/past-event-reports-and-resources/
The 'definition of dance/a dancer' intrigues me. I remember reading a long article (perhaps an excerpt of a book?) on the theme, but cannot find it anymore; I will post it when I do.
I recall it was something like this: If all physical movements are 'dance', raising your hand to catch a taxi could be a dance on its own. If it is 'rhythmical movement accompanied by music', Cunningham has stretched the boundaries of dance by ignoring the music. Aesthetic movements are seen in gymnastic, figure skating etc, but are they dance or sports?
Thanks Mina, I have found the DanceUK website really interesting, lots of articles which have got me thinking....
The one you mentioned is particularly relavent for my inquiry at the moment. From my interviews, it seems evident that 'interpretation' of ones dance performance can really effect ones participation. To some, it is a primary purpose of dancing (to please their audience,or to communicate a message for example) for others, the interpretation its self does not matter. Moreso, some responses how suggest it is the feeling they get from dancing that stimulates them, whether is is to be critically interpretted in a leading theatre, or dancing crazily in a nightclub, the meaning of dance is still the same. With todays boom in social media dance competitions and events, this got me thinking, should there be some common ground somewhere, or does it simply not matter? Perhaps the fact that the Arts is so subjective and open to indivuals interpretation it remains a popular Art form?
Another theme that seemed to emerge was that when music is played, they feel a natural urge to move to it! I think I can sympathise with this one! You pointing out Cunningham here has been interesting, in contrast he broke the boundaries by choreographing the movements, not to counts or beats or rhythms. Personally I find this difficult, what about you? Often the music stimulates the creative dance process for me.
I have created a facebook page for the BAPP programme students, please feel free to add me on facebook (Sophia Emma Douglas) and see the link on my profile!
How's everything going for you?
Post a Comment