My positionalities
as an African American dancer, political arts activist, scholar and movement
inventor substantiate my performativity. The critical stance of my performativity
is a resistance to being marked. I advocate for making and valuing differences
and subverting the oppression of the marked. I am against the “natural
assumption” of Black dance as a practice done by and for Black people. In this
case being marked is being a stereotype. In that regard my works aim to promote
non-stereotypical assumptions about the Black dance aesthetic. My work seeks to
go against the mark of Black dance since I am a Black choreographer employing
the practice of non-human dancing I am essentially negating the “natural
assumption” of Black dance. My resistance to being marked is not an attempt to
being perceived as unmarked --“normal”- white, male, etc.-- but to undermine
the oppression of this concept. While being “normal” warrants acceptance it
also hinders uniqueness and for this reason I’d rather my artistic expressions
not blend in. Blending in takes away from my purpose for achieving agency in my
field and this is why I believe inventing an authentic movement practice --one
that does not re-present any existing movement practices-- is required for
attaining my goal.
My approach to
accessing agency in my field manifests itself in my practice as research. If
the works I produce aim to represent and or re-present what is currently
popularized, then authenticity is impossible. Currently I am investigating the
efficacy of Merce Cunningham and Steve Paxton’s choreographic process chance as a non-human dancer articulates
it and exploring the various aesthetic interpretations of phenomenology for
this process. The mode of production I am employing to do so is the
appropriation of choreographic devices, which does not involve danced movement.
This is my approach to establishing an authentic movement practice.
This paper begins with a description of my sound
dance project using chance
choreography with Oobleck (matter transformation), media and sound. Then I will
discuss the functions of the American dance education system and the Westernized
dance production system and how their practices have influenced my practice as
research. Next I discuss my mode of production in terms of nation state art and
how my subjectivity/positionality informed my own hegemonic practices in this project.
Finally I outline my plans for substantiating the aesthetic merit of my mode of
production.
Project Description
My approach to experimenting
with tactile bodies employs a collaborative open structured choreographic process
with Oobleck (matter transformation), media and sound. My objective is to innovate
a movement practice I refer to as physical
beats, a sound dance. Initially I set out to develop sound patterns that
emulated and mimicked movement patterns by employing the choreographic devices
used for developing dances. I imagined the choreographic devices I applied such
as timing, ABA and canon, would be recognized by the Oobleck’s kinesthetic
response to the sound patterns I designed. However, that was an extremely
presumptuous expectation to have of a non-human dancer subject, especially
since choreographic devices and sound patterns can’t always be recognized by
the human dancers stylistic interpretations of either. Regrettably my
expectations were too high and immediately I was compelled to steer the project
in a different direction.
Since the Oobleck
reacts best to sustained vibratory sounds at a frequency above 30hz, I saw no
point in continuing to design sound patterns independent of the Oobleck’s
interpretative kinesthetic and auditory responses. I might not have ever
realized that the non-human dancer deserves access to agency similarly to the
human dancer, had I not experienced the Oobleck’s reaction to my choreographic
authority. I do not maintain that the non-human dancer subject represents or
re-presents the dancer and or the choreographer; still it is necessary that I
anthropomorphize the Oobleck to acknowledge its performance independent of my
ideologies. By anthropomorphizing the Oobleck I am able to make the supposition
that the role of the non-human dancer is just as essential to the
phenomenological study of abstract choreography as the human dancer. Perhaps
the Oobleck’s reaction to sound waves could be perceived as mimetic behavior
and interpreted as dancing. This is already evident by the numerous youtube
clips entitled “Dancing Oobleck,” depicting non-Newtonian fluid (matter
transformation) reacting to the sound waves emanating from a sub woofer
speaker.
I expected the
Oobleck to react to my subjugation the way it did in the youtube clips I’d
studied. When reacting to sustained high frequency sound waves, the Oobleck
rises up from its puddle about an inch or so and begins to slowly morph into
and out of various distorted shapes that collect and separate before descending
back to its puddle. Also I hoped that it might do more than what I’d been witnessing
it do in the video clips, such as morph at the same pace of the music or morph
in the same repetitive manner as the music’s repetitive pattern. However, in my
experiences with the Oobleck, it did nothing more than spread out to the edges
of the speaker and splatter up and out, and I have yet to witness it do much
else.
After several
unsuccessful attempts at appropriating the Oobleck’s “sound dance,” I
recognized that my proposed recontexualization
of the youtube clips I was borrowing from did not lend itself to possibilities
beyond my imposed aesthetic preferences. Thus leading me to my new
methodological approach: 1) play sustained sound waves at length for the
Oobleck to react to. 2) Video its reactions. 3) Compose recorded sounds that
mimic the rhythmic patterns of the Oobleck’s reactions. 4) Add the sound to the
video. I intend to investigate the effects of this multilayered mode of
production and use the outcomes to interpret the phenomenological aesthetics of
physical beats.
Westernized Dance and Education
The American dance
education system continues to function with an archaic model. One that
specifically caters to both 19th century and racially marginalized hierarchies.
Stemming from the historically recognized “high art” (European) vs. “low art”
(Black/African) dichotomy evident in Westernized dance productions, this hegemonic
structure is imported into and persists in the curriculum model for dance
education. The apparent hegemony of this system is further implicated by its methodical
integration practices via tokenism - the policy and practice of making only a
perfunctory effort to desegregate. While progress within this system has been
made, segregation and discrimination have yet to be fully dismantled. The
current inclusion of Black dance styles in Westernized dance productions is
superficial and that does not explore the genres' complexity and sophistication
in proportion to its influence within American and world cultures.
Subsequently Westernized
dance productions does not require the study and or practice of Black dance
techniques and vernaculars because its primarily preferred dance aesthetic is
limited to the focus of European dance practices. Consequently, non-Black
dancing bodies (white and visibilized) are not developing the skills necessary
to emulate or mimic the aesthetic quality of the Black dancing body (Other and
invisibilized) but offensively attempting to do so anyways. Yet due to the
predominately cultivated and practiced European (dominant) dance aesthetic,
Black dancing bodies maintain the skill and ability to emulate or mimic the
aesthetic quality of non-Black dancing bodies.
Although
components of African American dance techniques such as Jazz, Hip Hop and
African derived styles are being offered, they are typically not a central part
of the curriculum but rather exist as electives. Learning classical ballet and
modern dance techniques are essential to the development of any trained dancer,
yet other cultural and innovative approaches are generally overlooked and or
considered non-essential to a foundation of the well-trained 21st
century dancer and dance studies major.
Interrogating the
ideology of Westernized dance and education, which misappropriates and
segregates the practice and performance of Black dance is the stimulus for my
desire to achieve agency in this medium and to offer a more inclusive
alternative dance curriculum. Thus my approach to accessing agency is vested in
my present sound dance project physical
beats.
Prior to this
endeavor, I did not consider myself an abstract dance choreographer; I have
always been a narrative choreographer. And while I do consider myself a
movement inventor, I believed my choreographic innovations were exclusively for
the human dancer/non-dancer. The hegemonic cultivation of my subjectivity as a
choreographer/dance educator unconsciously caused me not to consider the possibility
of choreographic collaboration with a non-human dancer, in the same way that Westernized
dance productions and education do not consider viable approaches to proper
appropriation and integration of the Black dance aesthetic.
The Role Of Hegemony
Originally I was
mostly interested in my independent choreographic agency and unintentionally
subverting the Oobleck’s choreographic agency. I was never concerned with
anthropomorphizing the Oobleck until my manipulative process failed. My
approach to this project was completely autonomous. I am the human, I am the
choreographer, I operate the music, I make the Oobleck, and this afforded me
sovereignty. What I had yet to realize was that I couldn’t make the Oobleck
dance the way I wanted it to. In this regard the Oobleck has autonomy of its
kinesthetic and sensory responses and most importantly its choreographic
interpretation of both. It is this reality that makes the Oobleck
simultaneously anthropomorphic and mimetic. My failure to acknowledge the other
elements (Oobleck, electronic equipment and sound) as my partners working with
me and for me, not against me, compromised the desired functionality of my
project. In this instance I realized the hegemonic positionality/subjectivity
I’d unconsciously assumed.
Upon the
realization of my hegemonic subjectivity and distaste for its oppression, I was
suddenly propelled to think of my project as nation state art in the way that
the non-human dancer and Black dancer are minorities in the Westernized dance production
medium. The marginalization and exclusion we are subjected to by this medium
allows us to join forces and combat these injustices, utilizing our collective
aesthetic qualities to transgress and transcend the universals we are bounded
by, thereby affording us mutually exclusive agency.
This project does
not and cannot function as nation state art because of the non-human dancer and
human dancer relationship clash. Yet there is some peripheral relevance to the
affects of nation state art apparent in the commonalities we (the Oobleck and
I) do share, such as the disempowerment we have been subjected to and the
misappropriation, discredit and disrespect for our mutually exclusive artistic
expressions. As Dr. Hunter pointed out, “the Oobleck did dance and something
really interesting was happening” (Dr. Lynette Hunter, personal communication,
December 5, 2012). From my ideological vantage point, I was unable to recognize
this aesthetic interpretation. Ideology is the very stronghold that affects
phenomenology and often times fails to recognize the existence of aesthetics in
any medium.
I am certain Dr.
Hunter would interject here and proclaim, well
it’s a bit more complicated than that. And I would have to agree, because no
matter how you arrive at your phenomenological attitude about this project, the
reality is that I have anthropomorphized the Oobleck because it can be
considered humanlike. Nevertheless, it will always be non-human. And with the
exception of its autonomous kinesthetic and auditory responses, it maintains no
corporeal agency. Furthermore, its choreographic interpretation of both is
chance. While chance is a legitimate choreographic device --a process in which
elements are specifically chosen and defined but randomly structured to create
a dance or movement phrase-- the choreographer who is conscious of it can only
utilize it. Since the Oobleck is a non-human subject, it is unconscious of its
use of chance and consequently maintains no awareness of affecting
transgression or transcendence.
Much like ‘Carnival,’
my mode of production inadvertently “feeds ideology and allows the hegemonic
human dancer [my emphasis] to momentarily pretend that he/she has got the same
issues with representation that the non-human dancer [my emphasis] has, and can
enjoy transgressing and transcending in the same way.”[1]
The only difference between my positionality and the positionality of the
hegemonic human dancer is that as an African American human dancer I can only
benefit from hegemony over the non-human dancer. Therefore, like matter
transformation, I have the ability to morph in an out of hegemony over the
Oobleck while transgressing and transcending with the Oobleck. Therein lies the
complication.
Ironically my
hegemony has only adversely affected me, since the remaining elements existent
in my project have not been frustrated with our working relationship the way I
have been. However, once I anthropomorphized the Oobleck, I was then able to
argue that the Oobleck has been resistant to my hegemony and perhaps has been just
as frustrated with our working relationship as I. Relinquishing my desire to
manipulate the Oobleck’s reaction to my choreographic autonomy and opting to
share control of the process to learn from its reactions further proved the
importance of granting the disenfranchised access to agency.
The Plan
I am questioning
the aesthetic interpretations, values and preferences in dance practice,
performance and development. Most specifically I am exploring the ways in which
appropriation can stimulate innovation. I am primarily interested in how all of
these factors linked together inform and affect my performativity and how my
engagement with these exchanges might grant me access to agency in the hegemonic
system of Westernized dance productions.
In the area of
dance studies, practice and performance, efficacy is crucial to accessing
agency. Attention to creating visceral effects when in the developmental stages
of the work will aid in the dance practitioner’s successful mode of production.
For instance, my choice to work with Oobleck was a direct reflection of my
aesthetic awareness of its visceral effect. The apparent challenges with this
mode of production are often in defending its aesthetic merit. How long can
one’s attention be arrested by the image of solid particles suspended in liquid
quickly morphing between states? The results of my experimentations thus far
tell me approximately 2-3 minutes.
If I am seriously
attempting to establish an authentic movement practice utilizing this process
as my medium, I suspect that I will have to aim higher. The primary concept of
visualizing beat composition via matter transformation is an ambitious endeavor;
still it yields a superimposed approach.
Some examples I am
currently exploring include the following: phase 2 – I will dance a duet with
the Oobleck. In this phase I will grant the Oobleck choreographic agency by setting
choreograph on myself that mimics its matter transformation. Then I will seek
the assistance of a musician, more skilled in the area of music composition
than I, to collaboratively and organically set music to the choreography. Next I
will video the Oobleck’s performance and superimpose the music in the way that
I described earlier in phase 1. Finally I will produce this duet in a
performance space with a stage and a backdrop. I will dance on stage in front
of the backdrop with the video of the Oobleck dancing behind me projected on
the backdrop. What is important here is the rhetorical interaction that will be
generated between a human and an object, by the human. That is, what you dance
and why you dance it is the medium for the rhetoric of interaction that is
potentially a new way of thinking about human-world interactions.
Phase 3 - Upon
achieving success with phases 1 and 2, I’d like to then solicit the services of
a game developer to build a device that can be attached to the body inconspicuously
and used remotely via movement articulation. To this end, I will create the
work in real time using improvisation and chance. Acting as a human remote
control, my movements will signal a response from the music, which will in
tandem signal a response from the Oobleck. This trio performance will on some
level imitate Charles Sanders Peirce’s classification of triadic signs. Again I
will produce my method of performance on a stage with a backdrop. I will dance
on stage in front of the backdrop with the video of the Oobleck dancing (also
in real time) behind me projected on the backdrop. From a solo to a duet to a
trio, my multilayered mode of production illustrates what happens when the
choreographer/dancer allows their fantasies full play.
Phase 4 – I will
attempt to establish The Oobleck Dance Ensemble in collaboration with LJ Boogie
& Company. I hope to work with a group of dancers who are convinced of the
aesthetic merit of my work and wish to join me in further developing my
performativity and their own. I am interested in how the human dancer’s mimetic
representation of the Oobleck affects the aesthetics of my performativity.
Ultimately I am interested in whether or not this total endeavor will grant me
access to agency in the realm of Westernized dance productions and if my
performativity will be manifested as an authentic movement practice.
Conclusion
What I have
already learned from the Oobleck has allowed me to draw the comparison between
the functionalities of non-Black dancing bodies and Black dancing bodies with
non-human dancers and human dancers. In the same way my dance training and
education has not expected me to study the movement practices of Black dance
techniques and vernaculars, it has also not expected me to study the phenomena
of non-human dancer object orientations. Historically the ideology of Westernized
dance productions not only oppressed “uncivilized” dance aesthetics, but also
it also rejected abstract dance or any movement practice that wasn’t ballet.
Over time, dance
innovators sought to disrupt the normative of Westernized dance productions by
rebelling against its hegemonic structure. Subsequently abstract dance emerged
and widened the scope of choreographic concepts along with “multicultural”
dance, which afforded the dance world a grander appreciation for varied
aesthetic interpretations of dance and dance making. Abstract dance
choreographers and many non-white dance choreographers revolutionized this art
form and area of study by challenging the assumption that dancers and
choreographers must adhere to the dominant dance aesthetic to access and or
maintain agency in this medium. My sound dance project, physical beats, is intending to advance the art of dance by
challenging the dominant dance aesthetic practices of Westernized dance
productions.
No comments:
Post a Comment