[dance-tech] Re: Sensordance/ improvised / computational / conceptual

  • From: "Johannes Birringer" <Johannes.Birringer@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • To: <dance-tech@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Mon, 30 Oct 2006 16:06:22 -0000

dear all:

many thanks to the "curators" for their last, and very significant posting.  
You raise so many fascinating points that one will need to respond carefully, 
and perhaps in increments.
I applaud the level of discussion which has been achieved through these posts, 
and the very productive critical framework you propose.

Before going into detail, in later postings, i was wondering why we have not 
actually used such new critical frameworks and terminologies to look at 
performances and works produced in the last few years, in the dance world or in 
the dance-tech/perf.-tech world,  or , let me ask [... looking at the exemplars 
you give --  steve paxton, trisha brown, douglas dunn, yvonne rainer), why 
don't we use the opportunity now to look at contemporary works, such as 
Forsythe's "3 Atmospheric Studies", T.Brown's "How Long Does the Subject Linger 
on the Edge of the Volume",  Carol Brown's Sea "UnSea" ,  T.Ranch's " 16 
(R)evolutions",  Jaychandran Palazhy's "Purushartha", or hybrid pieces by Tania 
Fraga, Ivani Santana, Dumb Type, Pablo Ventura, and many others,   
installations or screen-based dance works / net -based dance works, animation 
works,  or works we consider significant in our context (produced over the last 
10 years), and find out how we can debate their contributions and the 
techniques of performance-making we have discovered in them?  

(I posted the essay on Forsythe to see whether someone wanted to pick up any of 
the intriguing commentaries on composition and layering)

Johannes Birringer

From: dance-tech-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx on behalf of curators -
Sent: Sun 10/22/2006 1
Subject: [dance-tech] Re: Sensordance/ improvised / computational / conceptual
In our initial categorisation we specified that computational modes of
composition we generative. What we failed to make clear is that we
were referring to specific algorithmic techniques. We consider all
modes of composition to be generative (movement producing) in nature
and thus remove the term from the description. conceptual has been
revised and choreographed [5] added:

# improvised ~ emergent, adaptive.
# computational ~ procedural, algorithmic.
# conceptual ~ linear, perfunctory.
# choreographed ~ structural, semiotic.

For completeness:

# improvised: goldberg variations (steve paxton)
# computational: accumulation (trisha brown)
# conceptual: 101 (douglas dunn)
# choreographed: trio a (yvonne rainer)

The performative input of conceptual dance is not mode exclusive, but
dependent on initial concept, and the (directly) subsequent ideas of
the artist 

Other related posts: