[dance-tech] Re: Thread1: Posthuman-Postbody-Postself---Postchoreography

  • From: "Jeannette Ginslov" <ginslov@xxxxxxxxx>
  • To: <dance-tech@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Thu, 10 Apr 2008 09:09:07 +0200

Hi Jaime

This just struck me after your words:

"in a transdisciplinary, transmedia context, where the écriture in which novel 
forms of proprioception....can work in between to create novel zones, bodies 
and architectures for new kinds of post-subjectivity...cross-modal perception 
may be enacted, then we are transgressing the frontiers of the discipline of 
choreography, and indeed the established territories and anatomies of the body 
in a deeper sense."
Is this the return of the aura of works of art?
Does post-choreography calls back the notion of the "aura" or the auratic 
moment for the one interacting? 
Each moment produced will be irreproducible? 
There is structure but the product changes slightly each time, reveals a unique 
experience to each
body/person interacting. Each interaction owned by the body/person that is 
agent and co-author, co- choreographer.

Also taking a break...too much work calls.


PS thanks Johannes for your wonderful and supportive feedback. Much appreciated.

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Jaime del Val" <jaimedelval@xxxxxxxxxxx>
To: <dance-tech@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Wednesday, April 09, 2008 5:14 PM
Subject: [dance-tech] Re: Thread1: Posthuman-Postbody-Postself---Postcoreography

> dear all,
> sorry if I take some time to respond, a bit of overwork like everybody, and
> there are so many threads to follow... but I'll be back asap, hopefully
> today or tomorrow!...
> best
> jaime
> ----- Original Message ----- 
> From: "Johannes Birringer" <Johannes.Birringer@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
> To: <dance-tech@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Sent: Tuesday, April 08, 2008 9:11 PM
> Subject: [dance-tech] Re: Thread1:
> Posthuman-Postbody-Postself---Postcoreography
> Jaime --- after reading some your propositions, can you say a bit more about
> how you understand the notion of the < performatic > in the context of our
> discussions on the post-choreographic ?
> (also in context of Nathaniel's recent remarks:
>>>But one of the most fascinating things the study of structuralism, and for
> that matter the body, has taught me personally is that these things are not
> only performative, but also generative and self-deforming. They change over
> time, through per-formance, through their poststructure, through enfleshed
> meaning-making and understanding. And so, perhaps, that change, that
> performance, that transformation is actually more essential for, at the core
> of, the "thing," than the performative utterances that name its parts (or
> activities). Perhaps the being-with of change, the interrogation, the
> process itself, is a pre-condition (or at least co-condition) for structure.
> In this case it may be vital to, sometimes (but certainly not always),
> ignore structure and instead engage with the embodied feedback loops between
> our presupposed understandings of such categories. >>
> very well, then, this is about what I had in mind when i wote of "structure
> as outcome" as few weeks ago, in the very performative sense that is being
> addressed here by all of us.
> (Jaime, you seem to have strong thoughts on where "performativities" might
> have originally been discussed, in the arena of queer theory and gender
> troubling writing/philosophy  - but you surely also saw the notion of the
> performative wander around a bit, and "Performanz"  has been a firmly
> established theoretical concept now in the continental performance studies
> in Germany and also the postdramatic theatre field. (I will repost a posting
> by Heide Lazarus on this issue, which is very interesting from a historical
> and conceptual point of view, and unfortunately was not receiving enough
> attention here, and i am not sure that her reference to the german speaking
> reception of the performative are widely known in other parts of the world,
> e.g. the publications by Erika Fischer-Lichte, Gabriele Brandstetter, but
> also Martina Leeker, Sibylle Krämer.......)
> "performatics" will soon be a featured topic also in a british performance
> journal, and PR took their feature theme of "Performatik" from a discussion
> that went on for a while in Poland, where theatre practitioners and scholars
> got together to explore PERFORMATYKA  *(see at bottom).
> again, if we were to ask now how the receptions of these terrms work in
> India or Brasil or Japan, or what terms might have travel to us from there
> (how come we don;t use more concepts from the japanese and indian dance
> technologies contexts?), we'd be in midst of the transcultural dynamics that
> was addressed by the posts on our languages
> & taxonomies.
> regards
> Johannes Birringer
> Jaime wrote:
> And this is also the framework in which I use the term POSTCOREOGRAPHY
> myself in relation to my own work: Firstly, when you coreograph a posthuman
> body, or when in the context of new media you work with nearly illegible
> bodies, fragmentary, new kinds of bodies that cannot be framed under the
> humanist project of which dance is part of (as far as we understand dance in
> western traditions, for there can be no general concept for dance), then we
> can speak of postcoreography. Secondly in a transdisciplinary, transmedia
> context, where the écriture of coreography is being developed in between, in
> a frontier zone of feedbacks with the musical, visual and other forms of
> écriture in which novel forms of proprioception and cross-modal perception
> may be enacted, then we are transgressing the frontiers of the discipline of
> coreography, and indeed the established territories and anatomies of the
> body in a deeper sense.
> In this respect I also speak of post-visual, post-musical and
> post-architectural.
> I am using the terms in the context of my work Microdances_Antibodies of
> Surveillance. pictures, videos and texts online here (we are completing the
> information and will soon launch it)
> http://www.reverso.org/Morf4_MICRODANAS-PERF.htm --- but the theoretical
> frameworks are not to be understood as ground for, nor as based upon, the
> work, they emerge in feedback and constitute independent fields, what other
> modes of thinking regarding the work there may be I do not know.
> So all these branches relate in different ways within the field of collapse
> of the contingent structures of our cultural traditions, knowledges, social
> structures and power, and we can work in between to create novel zones,
> bodies and architectures for new kinds of post-subjectivity.
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> ***
> In December 2006 the Grotowski Centre (now the Grotowski Institute) in
> Wroclaw, Poland in collaboration with Tomasz Kubikowski from the Warsaw
> Theatre Academy, hosted an international conference entitled in English
> 'Performance Studies: and Beyond'.  The event marked the translation into
> Polish and publication of Richard Schechner's textbook Performance Studies:
> An Introduction but the conference hosts and conveners were keen to think
> beyond the NYU school of Performance Studies and seek relevance and
> application for the term (and field) within an advanced and sophisticated
> mode of theatre studies in Poland.

Other related posts:

  • » [dance-tech] Re: Thread1: Posthuman-Postbody-Postself---Postchoreography