Dance Journal, Week 3 (Feb 2, 2010)

DNCE 320
Journal, Week 3
February 2, 2010

Jowitt, Deborah. “Beyond Description: Writing Beneath the Surface.” Moving History / Dancing Cultures: A Dance History Reader. Ed. Ann Dills and Ann Cooper Albright. Middletown, CT: Wesleyan UP, 2001. 7-11. Print.

Jowitt’s thesis is that when writing about dance, the writer should include enough description of what is actually happening – that is, the movements of the dancers, the scenery, lighting, etc. – to support the chosen criticism. She cautions, however, “Criticism can’t provide a print analogue for dance. Why should it?” In other words, include enough description so the reader knows what you’re referring to, but don’t try to describe every little detail, as that would detract from the expressive qualities of the dance. Some writers (such as Roger Copeland) don’t like descriptive writing and say, as Jowitt paraphrases, that it is “too intuitive, too close to the work, or demand too little brain power to count as intellectual.” Jowitt claims that descriptive writing can be useful for many types of criticism, and provides many examples to support her thesis.


Sklar, Deidre. “Five Premises for a Culturally Sensitive Approach to Dance.” Moving History / Dancing Cultures: A Dance History Reader. Ed. Ann Dills and Ann Cooper Albright. Middletown, CT: Wesleyan UP, 2001. 30-33. Print.

In this piece, Sklar puts forth five premises designed “to encourage an examination and widening of the frames through which we look at and conceptualize dance and movement.” These premises revolve around the idea that movement is culturally-specific – that the way a person from one culture moves will be different from the way a person from a different culture moves, or, even if the movement is the same, it will mean something entirely different – and that culture should be not just taken into account, but considered centrally when studying movement. Sklar goes further and claims that the movement itself may not be evidentiary of the concepts embodied by that movement on the surface, and that certain cultural knowledge can only be known via movement. Sklar writes of being “uncomfortable” with the “currently popular semiotic metaphor” that “overvalues the visual while ignoring the kinesthetic,” which seems to directly counter the point of the Jowitt article (that one must include a description of the dance when writing about it). Through the use of “empathic kinesthetic perception,” a combination of imitation and empathy which ignores the visual effects of movement and concentrates on the kinesthetic sense and the emotions the movement triggers in the dancer, and conversations with the dancers and other members of that culture (an attempt to guard against projection), Sklar has studied dance in various cultures. The article closes with the admonition that “we must do more than look at movement when we write about dance.”

At this point, my professor wrote: "dance criticism vs. dance ethnology"

Keali’inohomoku, Joann. “An Anthropologist Looks at Ballet as a Form of Ethnic Dance.” Moving History / Dancing Cultures: A Dance History Reader. Ed. Ann Dills and Ann Cooper Albright. Middletown, CT: Wesleyan UP, 2001. 33-43. Print.

Published in 1970, Keali’inohomoku writes that this article “is an attempt to bridge [the] communication gap” between anthropologists (who think of ballet as a form of ethnic dance) and dance scholars (who find that idea unacceptable). Keali’inohomoku’s thesis seems to be that dance scholars make distinctions between Western and non-Western dance that are not recognized by anthropologists, and that this shows the dance scholars’ ethnocentrism, a desire to separate “us” from “them.” Thus, “ethnic dance” becomes a placeholder for “non-Western,” and is conflated with “primitive,” which implies “inferior.” Anthropologists, on the other hand, use “ethnic dance” to “convey the idea that all forms of dance reflect the cultural traditions within which they developed,” an idea that the Sklar article seems to agree with (in fact, the Sklar article cites this Keali’inohomoku article). Keali’inohomoku lists several ways in which ballet contains cultural-specific details and is thus, an “ethnic dance” in the anthropological sense. Since these details are obvious to anyone who looks, Keali’inohomoku asks, “Why do we seem to need to believe that ballet has somehow become acultural? Why are we afraid to call it an ethnic form?” Keali’inohomoku closes the article with the affirmation that it’s ok to use the term “ethnic dance” as long as it is not derisive, but collective – that is, “a dance of a particular ethnic group,” which includes both Western and non-Western groups.

Keali'inohomoku, Joann W. "Angst Over Ethnic Dance." Cross Cultural Dance Resources Newsletter 10 (1990): 2-10. Print.

This article is a look back, 20 years later, over some of the same issues addressed by the previous article. Keali’inohomoku notes that EuroAmerican dancers are becoming more inclusive and credits this largely to the Information Age in which people all over the world are becoming more aware of other cultures. However, in this growing awareness and inclusiveness, the term “ethnic” is still seen as polarizing, as signifying “Otherness” and implying inferiority. As a result, movements are afoot to replace the word with suitable “euphemism” (as described by Keali’inohomoku), such as “world,” “multicultural,” “culturally diverse,” or “international,” etc. Keali’inohomoku maintains that each of these words has its own problems, and are either confusing or polarizing (or both). She writes, “The point is that the label of ethnic dance is contaminated [by negative connotations] and is unlikely to be purged [of those connotations].” How then should we label dance (or other means of expression)? Keali’inohomoku asserts that there is no need for a single over-arching label: “Bharatanatyam is Bharatanatyam; a Flamenco dancer is a Flamenco dancer. A dance is a dance and a dancer is a dancer.” In other words, let each dancer (regardless of ethnicity of the dance, dancer, or audience) describe themselves in whatever way they are comfortable doing.

My grade for this journal: "Excellent."

***

I'm not sure how to create a hanging indent in Blogger so I can do the proper MLA thing for the article titles, etc. If anybody knows, please let me know!

.