Harmony Bench

Motion and representation: the language of human movement

‘collaboration’. Such links create a sense of breath, breadth, exchange, interchange and dialogue across the collection. Hilary Keale, in describing her creative practice, writes that she moves ‘through the interstices of many disciplines, gathering them together; breathing life into them and then letting them go into the work while perhaps never fully inhabiting a single one of them on its own’ (190). Sarah Whatley suggests that Motion Capture produces work that is ‘far from “standing reserve” in its generation of interstitial experiments and expressions’ (203). Indeed, there are multiple fascinating links and connections to be found by delving into and exploring the interstices offered within and between the chapters. What resounds loud and clear for this reader is the acknowledgement and honouring of Independent Dance artist and somatic practitioner Gill Clarke’s contribution to the development of dance. Hers was a deeply researched and informed practice in attending to movement which inspired independent dance enquiry and activity. In ‘Pedagogy Perspectives’ (Chapter 15) Fiona Bannon and Duncan Holt remind us that she was not only a person who danced but ‘who held a clear conviction that the ecology of thinking through motion could facilitate affective and significant personal and cultural growth’ (219). Many chapters explicitly reference Gill Clarke’s influence; others resonate with the spirit of her work. In sequence, the writings tend to assume prior knowledge. ‘Embodiment’ and ‘corporeality’, for example, can sometimes be confusing concepts for undergraduates and relative newcomers to the field, and established somatic practices are not necessarily well-known. In the last chapter, Martha Eddy offers a useful overview of the history and development of somatic practices (288–289). This could have been usefully forefronted and a glossary of terms and brief descriptions would have made the book more user-friendly. This could perhaps be something to be considered for future editions. Overall, however, the book strongly conveys that dance and somatic practice is ‘a burgeoning field of scholarly and artistic inquiry which extends increasingly across geographical and disciplinary borders’ (13). The scope of Attending to Movement is wide and the content so rich that a short review cannot do it justice. The book will surely fulfil the editors’ hopes that the writing ‘extends and deepens knowledge about the place of somatic philosophy within dance studies’ and ‘generates further debate and curiosity about this fertile field of thought and practice, stimulating more moving and writing to enliven our living in this world’ (15).

The Oxford handbook of dance and theater

The Oxford Handbook of Dance and Theater, edited and with an introduction by Nadine GeorgeGraves, offers readers an extended tour of contemporary disciplinary, interdisciplinary and cross-disciplinary scholarship taking shape in the fields of dance and theatre studies. GeorgeGraves opens this large collection by reflecting on the disciplinary boundaries of dance and theatre in academia. Although many of the authors in this volume have made their homes in dance or in theatre departments, some, such as George-Graves herself, have been considered ‘too theater for dance, too dance for theater’ as the title of her introduction indicates (1). By the time readers reach the final chapter, they may well wonder why the two disciplines have not made for better companions in academe. (I say this while fully acknowledging that when dance and theatre are combined in the same academic department, theatre generally overshadows dance in enrolments, productions and funding.) They may additionally wonder if the continued separation of these two fields upholds aesthetic conservatism in practical training, history and criticism that contemporary performing artists are in the process of dismantling – notwithstanding ongoing concerns regarding the racial and gender politics of casting. By bringing theatre and dance together, one notices immediately that performance practices located on the margins of each discipline become central when theatre and dance are combined. Popular practices such as musical theatre, vaudeville, physical theatre, circus and a host of multidisciplinary performance traditions outside the Western canon shine through in this collection of essays.

Screendance: Inscribing the Ephemeral Image by Douglas Rosenberg; Dancefilm: Choreography and the Moving Image by Erin Brannigan

Over the years, screendance has generated flurries of interest within the scholarly dance community, only to watch that interest wane again and again with shifting academic trends. The past decade, however, has seen a slow-churning energy that may result in a more sustainable conversation around dance onscreen, much of which has been fueled by screendance artists and programmers themselves. A number of volumes of interest to academia have emerged as screendance artists have made homes for themselves in university settings. For makers of dance onscreen, Katrina McPhersons Making Video Dance: A Step-by-Step Guide to Creating Dance for the Screen (2006) and Karen Pearlmans Cutting Rhythms: Shaping the Film Edit (2009) are especially noteworthy. After Sherril Doddss important historical and analytical book Dance on Screen: Genres and Media from Hollywood to Experimental Art (2001), however, screendance scholarship was not positioned to capitalize and build on Doddss provocation. Liz Aggiss and Billy Cowies edited collection Anarchic Dance (2006) offers a wonderful model for gathering together the creative work of a team of artists and scholarly writing about their work, but like Envisioning Dance on Film and Video (2002), a collection that was pulled together under Judy Mitomas direction, the tone is somewhat self-congratulatory and the analysis is tepid. Finally, two books have come out that will stand alongside Doddss to re-ignite conversations in the screendance field and in Dance Studies generally, and will do so in a generative and critical way: Douglas Rosenbergs Screendance: Inscribing the Ephemeral Image (2012) and Erin Brannigans Dancefilm: Choreography and the Moving Image (2011).