Abstract
Since the turn of the millennium we have witnessed the beginnings of a growing number of projects that bring fresh attention to questions surrounding the documentation and dissemination of the processes and products of dance and wider performance practices. New kinds of digital inscriptions and tools for capturing and rendering movement are now available to access and study dance in innovative ways, raising questions about authorship and the extent to which dance is an evolving, mutable process mediated via many different encounters. These meetings may be between dance makers, audiences, galleries, theatres, programmers and with experts from different scholarly disciplines and subject domains. Many of these initiatives intentionally traverse analogue, digital and embodied methods of transmission and offer alternative ways to think about how dance is visualised, remembered, interpreted and transformed. Choreographers and performance makers are also drawing from practical and intellectual enquiries into the materiality and immateriality of the dancing body as source for making work. As a consequence, choreography, as a conceptual and practical process, is continually changing, informed as much by the integration and exploitation of digital technologies in the making, documenting and preservation of the work, as by the individual proclivities of dance artists.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
References
Auslander, P. (2009) ‘Reactivation: Performance, Mediatization and the Present Moment’, in M. Chatzichristodoulou, J. Jefferies and R. Zerihan (eds), Interfaces of Performance. Farnham: Ashgate, pp. 81–93.
Benjamin, W. (1970) ‘The Work of Art in the Age of Mechanical Reproduction’, in W. Benjamin, Illuminations. London: Pimlico, pp. 211–44.
Birringer, J. (2007) ‘Data Art and Interactive Landscapes’, in S. deLahunta (ed.), Swan Quake the User Manual. Plymouth: Liquid Press, pp. 37–52.
Borcic, B. (2007) ‘Guided Tour: Performance Art and its Relation to Archiving’, in GAMA, http://wiki.gamagateway.eu/index.php/Gidded_t our_:_Performance_ Art_and_its_Relation_to_Archiving [accessed 8 February 2013].
Chatzichristodoulou, M., Jefferies, J. and Zerihan, R. (eds) (2009) ‘Introduction’, in Interfaces of Performance. Famham: Ashgate, pp. 2–5.
deLahunta, Scott (ed.) (2007) Swan Quake the User Manual. Plymouth: Liquid Press.
Fabius, J. (2009) ‘Seeing the Body Move: Choreographic Investigations of Kinaesthetics at the End of the Twentieth Century’, in J. Butterworth and L. Wildschut (eds), Contemporary Choreography: A Critical Reader. Abingdon: Routledge, pp. 331–45.
Gibson, R. (2010) ‘Interview: Bruno Martelli and Ruth Gibson (igloo)’s Swan Quake (2007)’, www.gamescenes.org/2010/05/interview-bruno-martelli-and-ruth-gibson-igloos-swanquake-2007.html [accessed 8 February 2013].
Gibson, R. and Martelli, B. (2013) ‘As Yet Impossible Presents igloo: Kinosphir-She’s Lost Control’, www.salford.ac.uk/mediacityuk/mediacityuk/as-yet-impossible-presents-igloo-kinosphir-shes-lost-control [accessed 8 February 2013].
Hirsenfelder, I. (2007) ‘Characteristics of the 8 GAMA-Archives’, in GAMA www.gama-gateway.eu/index.php?id=40 [accessed 8 February 2013].
Jefferies, J. (2009) ‘Conclusion’, in M. Chatzichristodoulou, J. Jefferies and R. Zerihan (eds), Interfaces of Performance. Farnham: Ashgate, pp. 199–202.
Jordan, S. (ed.) (2000) Preservation Politics: Dance Revived, Reconstructed, Remade. London: Dance Books.
Lepecki, A. (2010) ‘The Body as Archive: Will to Re-Enact and the Afterlives of Dances’, Dance Research Journal, 42: 2, Winter.
McFee, G. (2011) The Philosophical Aesthetics of Dance: Identity, Performance and Understanding. Hampshire: Dance Books.
McFee, G. (2013) ‘Admirable Legs; or, the Dancer’s Importance for the Dance’, in J. Bunker, A. Pakes and B. Rowell (eds), Thinking Through Dance: The Philosophy of Dance Performance and Practices. Hampshire: Dance Books, pp. 22–45.
Phelan, P. (1993) ‘The Ontology of Performance: Representation without Reproduction’, in Unmarked: The Politics of Performance. London: Routledge, pp. 146–66.
Salter, C. (2009) ‘Environments, Interactions and Beings: The Ecology of Performativity and Technics’, in M. Chatzichristodoulou, J. Jefferies and R. Zerihan (eds), Interfaces of Performance. Farnham: Ashgate, pp. 27–42.
Thomas, H. (2003) ‘Reconstruction and Dance as Embodied Textual Practice’, in A. Carter (ed.) (2004) Rethinking Dance History: A Reader. London: Routledge, pp. 32–45.
Whatley, S. (2012) ‘The Poetics of Motion Capture and Visualization Techniques: The Differences between Watching Real and Virtual Dancing Bodies’, in D. Reynolds and M. Reason (eds), Kinesthetic Empathy in Creative and Cultural Practices. Bristol: Intellect, pp. 263–80.
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Copyright information
© 2015 Sarah Whatley
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Whatley, S. (2015). Materiality, Immateriality and the Dancing Body: The Challenge of the Inter in the Preservation of Intangible Cultural Heritage. In: Causey, M., Meehan, E., O’Dwyer, N. (eds) The Performing Subject in the Space of Technology. Palgrave Studies in Performance and Technology. Palgrave Macmillan, London. https://doi.org/10.1057/9781137438164_6
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1057/9781137438164_6
Publisher Name: Palgrave Macmillan, London
Print ISBN: 978-1-349-68364-2
Online ISBN: 978-1-137-43816-4
eBook Packages: Palgrave Theatre & Performance CollectionLiterature, Cultural and Media Studies (R0)