Dance Practices as Research: Approaches to the Safeguarding and Transmission of the Intangible Cultural Heritage of Dance 3031305809, 9783031305801

Citation preview

Heritage Studies

Vicky Kämpfe

Dance Practices as Research Approaches to the Safeguarding and Transmission of the Intangible Cultural Heritage of Dance

Heritage Studies Series Editor Marie-Theres Albert, Internationale Akademie Berlin für innovative Pädagogik, Psychologie und Ökonomie gGmbH (INA), Institut Heritage Studies (IHS), Berlin, Germany Editorial Board Members Verena Aebischer, University Paris Ouest Nanterre la Défense,  Nanterre Cedex, France Christina Cameron, University of Montreal, Montreal, QC, Canada Claire Cave, University College Dublin, Dublin, Ireland Magdalena Droste, Brandenburg University of Technology Cottbus-Senftenberg, Cottbus, Germany Jennifer Harris, Curtin University, Perth, Australia Ana Pereira Roders, Delft University of Technology, DELFT, Zuid-Holland, The Netherlands Anca Claudia Prodan, Institute Heritage Studies, Tauer, Germany Birgitta Ringbeck, Federal Foreign Office of Germany, Berlin, Germany Sabine von Schorlemer, Technische Universität Dresden, Dresden, Sachsen, Germany Helaine Silverman, Anthropology Department, University of Illinois at Urbana Champaign, Champaign, IL, USA Jutta Ströter-Bender, University of Paderborn, Paderborn, Germany

The idea to publish this scientific series emerged as a result of the transformation process of heritage from a cultural and natural asset that provides history and identity to a commodity with economic interests. Its contextual framework is provided by the UNESCO Convention Concerning the Protection of the World Cultural and Natural Heritage (1972), the UNESCO Convention for the Safeguarding of the Intangible Cultural Heritage (2003) and the UNESCO Memory of the World Programme. The research focus of the series is the wide range of applications and constructions of heritage associated with the above-named standard-setting instruments and their corresponding perceptions and paradigms. The reason for this is the fact that despite – or perhaps because of – these standardsetting instruments on the protection of heritage, there is an enormous variety in the understandings of what heritage is, could be or should be. Different interpretations of heritage are evident in diverse structures and perceptions, from material to immaterial, from static to dynamic or even from individual to social or cultural. These interpretations were expressed in paradigms formulated in very different ways, e.g. saying that heritage has an inherent cultural value or ascribing importance for sustainable human development to heritage. Diverse perceptions of heritage are associated with conservation and use concepts as well as with their underlying disciplines, including inter- and transdisciplinary networks. Regionally and internationally, theoretically and practically, individually and institutionally, the epistemological process of understanding heritage still finds itself in its infancy. Insofar the new series Heritage Studies is overdue. The series aims to motivate experienced and young scholars to conduct research systematically in the broad field of Heritage Studies and to make the results of research available to the national and international, theoretically- and practically-­ oriented, disciplinarily and interdisciplinarily established heritage community. The series is structured according to the key UNESCO conventions and programmes for heritage into three sections focusing on: World Heritage, Intangible Cultural Heritage and Memory of the World. Although the conventions and programmes for heritage provide a framework, the series distinguishes itself through its attempt to depart from the UNESCO-related political and institutional context, which dominates the heritage discourse today, and to place the theme of heritage in a scientific context so as to give it a sound and rigorous scientific base. To this end, each of the three main sections addresses four dimensions of the heritage discourse broadly framed as Theory and Methods, Paradigms, History and Documents, and Case Studies.

Vicky Kämpfe

Dance Practices as Research Approaches to the Safeguarding and Transmission of the Intangible Cultural Heritage of Dance

Vicky Kämpfe Culture Studies Leuphana University of Lüneburg Lüneburg, Germany

Heritage Studies ISBN 978-3-031-30580-1    ISBN 978-3-031-30581-8 (eBook) https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-30581-8 © The Editor(s) (if applicable) and The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2023 This work is subject to copyright. All rights are solely and exclusively licensed by the Publisher, whether the whole or part of the material is concerned, specifically the rights of translation, reprinting, reuse of illustrations, recitation, broadcasting, reproduction on microfilms or in any other physical way, and transmission or information storage and retrieval, electronic adaptation, computer software, or by similar or dissimilar methodology now known or hereafter developed. The use of general descriptive names, registered names, trademarks, service marks, etc. in this publication does not imply, even in the absence of a specific statement, that such names are exempt from the relevant protective laws and regulations and therefore free for general use. The publisher, the authors, and the editors are safe to assume that the advice and information in this book are believed to be true and accurate at the date of publication. Neither the publisher nor the authors or the editors give a warranty, expressed or implied, with respect to the material contained herein or for any errors or omissions that may have been made. The publisher remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations. This Springer imprint is published by the registered company Springer Nature Switzerland AG The registered company address is: Gewerbestrasse 11, 6330 Cham, Switzerland

With special thanks to Prof. Dr. Marie-­ Theres Albert, whose encouragement for the research project made this publication possible in the first place. I am also grateful to the Advisory Board of Heritage Studies; their patience and trust made it possible for this study to be brought into the discussion. In a special way, I would also like to thank all the critical reviewers; their valuable remarks, comments, and additions to key aspects of dance heritage have contributed important differentiations and concretisations, in particular Dr. Claudia Fleischle-Braun. Above all, I have to thank Laura Brandt, who proofread the manuscript in her attentive and dedicated way. Finally, I thank all those who research, think, dance, and set materialities and ideas in motion for a living heritage.

Dancing must have a very different purpose than mere technique or routine. It is about finding a language – with words, with images, movements, moods – that makes something of what is always already there perceptible. But it is a very, very difficult process to make it visible. I always feel that it is something you have to be very careful with. It is not about art, nor is it about mere skill. It is about life, and finding a language for life. Pina Bausch (Quoted from Bundeskunsthalle Bonn (2016): Behind the art. Pina Bausch and the dance theatre. Available online: https://www.bundeskunsthalle.de/mediathek. html#c21493, Min. 0:12 (last access: 27.01.2021).)

Introduction

By defining intangible cultural heritage, a conceptual milestone was set and, above all, set in motion. In the occidental way of thinking, the value of a cultural artefact no longer consists solely in its tangible nature or in the exchange value of things, but rather a declared value is assigned to the so-called intangible on the basis of an institutional discourse. Thus, a hitherto conceptually indeterminable is after all granted the right to exist. Since then, the intangible has become increasingly relevant in political discourse and action, in the media, and not least in the public sphere. There is talk and discussion about what exactly the intangible is, how it can be determined and communicated, and to what extent it can be separated from the tangible at all. This is precisely the point of discussion that guides the present text: to what extent can such a categorial separation be determined and sustained in the first place? This leads to the question of what the conceptualisation of an intangible cultural heritage can do for the academic discourse, but especially in a social context. And it also raises the question of the extent to which cultural practices carried out in social life can actually be fitted into this concept at all. These considerations call for a reflection on what happens to cultural practices when they are recorded, described, and communicated within the categories of intangible cultural heritage. After all, it is ultimately a process of evaluating and possibly defining them. Cultural practices, however, are shaped by the very conditions of their local and temporal setting, by the people practising them, special objects and spaces associated with their practice, as well as by dynamic processes and changes. This offers new lines of thinking about how forms of cultural and personal presence such as space, time, corporeality, and identity relate to the category of the intangible; moreover, how these can be understood, determined, and communicated in their interpersonal and socio-structural processes. It likewise casts doubt on the extent to which the intangible should exist without a temporal, physical, and spatial presence. On the other hand, the period of a complete shut-down of in-person cultural activities due to a pandemic has taught us that even this paradigm can be challenged. Cultural practice transforms into a virtual streaming – and zoom-­ presence – until the forced and unmistakably necessary return to personal presence after the zoom-fatigue (gtf, 2020, p. 2). What, then, determines cultural practice in ix

x

Introduction

any media-transmitted form – online, textual, verbal, visual as photography, video recording or soundtrack, as artwork in the various material formats, as exhibited objects, body-transmitted, as an object of scientific interest, as part of an archive’s collection? The aforementioned differentiations already suggest that more adequate methods than only the conventional scientific methods of interpretation and empiricism are needed to think about and resolve the posed questions. The demand at academic conferences and symposia for contributions on such methods is growing remarkably. Notions of presence, performativity, and the intangible are of increasing interest. The efforts to investigate processes and situations of performative, aesthetic, or generally cultural practices with adequate terms and tools are apparent. Thus, the aim of this publication is to formulate and examine possible approaches. This will be illustrated by the example of dance. Various forms of dance and dance expression have already been nominated as intangible cultural heritage. As of January 2021, there are 213 entries from 97 countries (of the current 584 entries from 131 countries) on the Representative List of the Intangible Cultural Heritage of Humanity that relate to dance traditions or dance practices as part of overarching cultural traditions.1 Furthermore, the practices associated with dance encompass a wide variety of forms of expression from different socio-cultural and infrastructural contexts and with different social values ascribed to them. At the same time, this results in the exclusion of the term dance as far as possible in the context of this publication. For dance as a concept that encompasses all dance situations and demands for a concrete definition is practically inconceivable. In practice, dance practices prove to be too varied, too diverse and differentiated, with different positions in the social hierarchy, and tied to processes of implementation, materials and structures, networks and values, to be subsumed under the one term dance. If, in the context of this study, the term dance forms is understood primarily as the various types of concrete dance activity, the term dance practices additionally refers to the associated processes, structural necessities, and formal settings that are connected with the performance of those dance forms. The rich variety of dance practices is based on the most diverse traditional and artistic ways of working in dance and principles of dance. Such a conceptual division demands for a diversity of methods and at the same time contains this diversity within itself. Thus, this study locates itself in the discourse of dance studies, which will be outlined in the following section within the context of this research context (Gehm et al., 2007; Bischof & Rosiny, 2010; Huschka, 2009). If one accordingly understands dance practices as  For more details, see the Representative List of the Intangible Cultural Heritage of Humanity on the official UNESCO website. Online: https://ich.unesco.org/en/lists?text=dance&multinational= 3&display1=inscriptionID#tabs (last access: 27.01.2021) Here, practices nominated as intangible cultural heritage can be viewed using a wide range of search criteria, such as those relating to the criterion of dance. In addition to the official description of the cultural practices, the nomination and designation documents as well as the regular reports, furthermore the images and video material related to the cultural practice can be viewed in the representative list. In addition, there are assigned categories and areas for the nominated cultural practice as well as links for more context within the representative list. 1

Introduction

xi

concrete cultural practices, one simultaneously breaks with the ‘holy mountain’ of conceptual and categorial problematics. With the currently available scientific methods, values and categories are formulated and assigned to dance practices and initially written down. Dance practice is thus placed into a scientific system of categories. The processes of scientific practice associated with the recording of dance practices will therefore always have to be reflected upon. In the best case, it becomes apparent what kind of transformations dance practices undergo as soon as they are confronted with the scientific ductus and even become scientific practice themselves. In the scientific work, on the other hand, the potential that the implicit forms of knowledge of dance have for scientific knowledge becomes evident. The argumentation underlying this study is based on a now established basic paradigm in the research discourse. It states that a specific knowledge is produced in the moment of dance. This is tied to processes of corporeality, spatiality, temporality, and emotivity. In recent years, this knowledge has increasingly become the focus of cognitive interest. The question of the concept of the intangible in connection with approaches to dance practices – especially in view of the discussion on the cultural heritage of dance  – makes it possible to reconsider the valorisation and significance of dance practices in the various social discourses. Especially since this supposedly intangible is to be counted among the necessary categories of any material existence and scientific understanding. Accordingly, it is put up for discussion whether the concept of the intangible is to be led ad absurdum in the end. On the other hand, the concepts and conditions formulated for dance situations should be reconsidered as part of a system of materialities, contexts of meanings, and performative processes of becoming. The argumentation to be developed in this study aims to demonstrate this. In order to reconcile content and form, it would have been fitting to incorporate dance practices into this text so as to provide a performative approach to reading and comprehending. Yet this publication still adheres to the conventional formal format. Thus, the challenge of conveying performative knowledge or empractical methods as a publication in an adequate form remains unanswered. May this remain an open perspective in order to ultimately realise the aim of the following argumentations in its full scientific relevance. Against this background, the present text will attempt to make the corresponding conceptual and categorical problems as well as the methodological practice comprehensible. Ideally, this will serve as a starting point for further thoughts and development. A corresponding draft of a research perspective, in terms of both theory and methodology, as well as practical implementation, is proposed in the concluding part of this study. The first chapter introduces the topic of the cultural heritage of dance and the current state of research. The focus lies on the current understanding of intangible cultural heritage and cultural practice. Current perspectives on approaches to dance practices will be presented. Particular attention will be paid to the situation in German-speaking countries, where very innovative approaches have emerged in the last 20 years within the field of dance studies. Thus, the current state of research and the terminology and starting points provided by it will be covered. Furthermore, an insight into a preceding case study on the intangible cultural heritage of tango,

xii

Introduction

which was inscribed in 2009, is given. The moment of its inscription was the starting point of realising and recording the mechanisms, interests, and changes associated with the inscription process – both at the institutional level and at the level of the respective practices. Further on, first argumentative approaches regarding the aim of this study can be elaborated and critical positions can be formulated. The second chapter is dedicated to the concept of the intangible with regard to performative action. The concept of the intangible is elaborated upon both in the understanding of the UNESCO Convention and in the understanding of the sociology of movement, and its particular value is highlighted. This will then be illustrated using the example of dance practices. Based on the aspects of performativity and materiality that become apparent in dance situations, the concept of movement material and its processes of becoming will be discussed further with regard to the materiality of the intangible. One line of thought is oriented towards the idea that performativity can serve as a key concept for looking at the interconnectedness – which still proves to be problematic and elusive in the current discourse – of dance practices, the things and objects involved, ascribed meanings as well as the circumstances and conditions on an infrastructural, social, and personal level of the performers that are at play in dance processes of becoming. This is followed by the third chapter on the value of – not only dance – movement. In the argumentation, dance practices are first determined as performative acting within socio-structural processes. Within this framework, connected processes and mechanisms of dance situations are examined on the various levels that are to be differentiated. Especially processes of incorporation, reproduction, and the generation of implicit knowledge prove to be constitutive aspects. In the context of options for recording, communicating, and archiving the latter, the practices and processes to be named in dance situations can be described in their conceptual amalgamation as a living archive of dance. Based on this conceptual framework, it is then possible to deal more concretely with the safeguarding and transmission of dance heritage in the present. Special attention will be paid to the processes of institutionalisation of informal practices as well as to the concept of the archive in the opposition between the lived safeguarding and the writing down, in the sense of creating a fixed and official version, of cultural inventories. Subsequently, the fourth chapter elaborates on performative methods as an adequate scientific approach to dance practices and their knowledge. Dance practices refer to both cognitively perceptible and incorporated, and thus necessarily person-­ bound, knowledge. Together, they form a dance knowledge, in which three levels become clear. Thus, a knowledge of dance means describing and grasping through analytical methods in terms of perceiving; knowledge about dance refers to the circulating discursive knowledge in the form of a discourse; knowledge through dance refers to one’s own bodily, sensorial, and emotional grasp in the form of an empractical experience. This differentiation provides sufficient justification for perceiving dance practices as social and individual repositories of knowledge. Accordingly, they are not only regarded as a scientific object of research, but are themselves a performative method in their practice. In this way, they function as a way of accessing knowledge that is generated by themselves. The descriptions that

Introduction

xiii

are to be made of the knowledge embedded in dance practices, descriptions which this approach makes possible, will then be compared with the definitions of the intangible previously elaborated on. The fifth chapter looks at the implementation in practice. It presents the concept and implementation of a Performative Dance Archive as a way of approaching and analysing dance practices in the context of university seminars. The Performative Dance Archive works simultaneously as a cognitive and empractical method for recording, archiving, and communicating dance knowledge. This concept is used to examine, on a theoretical and practical level, the ways in which implicit knowledge is available as a knowledge base. A reflection based on this practical experience concludes the chapter. In terms of its methodological suitability, it is primarily the aspect of the linguisation of such knowledge that remains to be reconsidered; moreover, it is a question of the value ascribed to this knowledge; a third aspect focuses on the archiving process. In addition, the question of what scientific access means for dance practices in terms of processes of change and mechanisms of formalisation is up for discussion. In the final conclusion, the arguments of this study will be summarised. Concluding from this, the oxymoron of the intangible is highlighted. This is followed by an outlook on options for the cultural heritage of dance and possible ways of implementing it in the sense of a living dance heritage. The aim and the argument of this publication are in line with the discourse of the still young dance studies and the ongoing academic discussion on intangible heritage. According to the editors of the Heritage Studies series, Prof. Dr. Marie-Theres Albert and Prof. Minja Yang, the latter is long overdue, as the “scientific process of understanding heritage is still in its infancy, regionally and internationally, theoretically and practically, as well as individually and institutionally”. Moreover, they state that “there is enormous diversity in understanding what heritage is, what it could be, or what it should be”.2 Thus, the editors deserve a special thanks for accepting this study as a contribution to the Heritage Studies series and thereby allowing it to be introduced into the larger academic discussion on the subject. Research approaches to dance still find themselves at the margins of academic discourse. The increasing reflection and research on relevant repositories of knowledge and findings in Tanzwissenschaften (dance studies in the German-speaking context) – a discipline which is still in the process of establishing itself – in sociology of movement, and sociology of culture, which is currently reorienting itself, but also in cultural studies and dance studies is slowly changing this status. This can be said in particular with regard to their importance for knowledge generation, but also their social relevance. Thus, dance forms are now perceived as socially and individually constitutive repositories of knowledge as well as a challenge to established notions of knowledge and science. However, their study still requires justification and their appreciation within the scientific canon is correspondingly low. This can in large

 Quoted from Albert/Yang: The Heritage Studies Series (n.d.). Available online: https://heritagestudies.eu/category/veroeffentlichungen/buecher/reihe-heritage-studies/ (last access: 27.01.2021). 2

xiv

Introduction

parts be attributed to the fact that the exact nature of the additional value that the respective findings, forms of knowledge, and causal correlations can contribute to the field of university research and its knowledge production has not yet been determined in concrete terms. This is also reflected in the still limited research discourse, which, however, is already becoming more nuanced and detailed in certain aspects and areas. Within the German-speaking context of dance studies, researchers  – many of whom are active practitioners of dance practices, or at least cultural practices themselves  – are developing arguments for understanding dance and other forms of expression linked to corporeality as practices of the so-called intangible (in the sense of the ephemerality in relation to bodily movements). Here, very innovative approaches have emerged in the last 20 years. However, in the German-speaking context, dance studies has been establishing itself only since the 1990s, parallel to the sociology of movement, building on the foundations of cultural studies, cultural anthropology, and the sociology of the body. The Gesellschaft für Tanzforschung (Society for Dance Research) published its first yearbook in 1990, marking the beginning of the development of dance studies in the German-speaking context. In the German-speaking regions, the state-funded programme TANZPLAN has continued these first scientific dance experiments with an increasing number of research projects since the 2000s. Within the framework of these projects, a comprehensive series of publications on the state of dance research in the German-speaking context, which also looks at research from France and the USA, was realised for the first time. While the discourse in the German-speaking regions focuses on socio-­ cultural contexts (Klein, 2004; Funke-Wieneke & Klein, 2008), on dance practice as a knowledge-generating and processual moment (Brandstetter & Klein, 2006; Gehm et al., 2007; Bischof & Rosiny, 2010; Fischer-Lichte, 2016) and also, more and more, on dance heritage (Diehl & Lampert, 2011; Fleischle-Braun et al., 2017; Odenthal, 2019), the research conducted in the English-speaking world takes its cue from another tradition of dance studies that has been establishing itself since the 1980s. Due to the distinctive development of modern dance and contemporary dance, it is primarily oriented towards concepts of the body (for example, the epistemological relevance of the concept of body knowledge in Parviainen, 2002 and Sheets-Johnstone, 1999) and the notion of performative acts (with regard to supporting movement as a category of social mechanisms and forms of expression or identity, among others in Thomas, 2001; Leigh-Foster, 1996, 2009; Desmond 20064). Within the framework of cultural studies, the focus lies on the critical potential of popular dance forms and on the aspect of identities (this is due to political implications concerning ethnic identity, postcolonial aspects, and gender issues that can be found in dance; e.g., in McFee, 1992; Reed, 1998). Argumentative starting points for research in dance studies refer primarily to the special characteristics of dance practices: their body-boundness, the ephemerality in the sense of fleetingness, the incorporated knowledge or the practice knowledge and its determinability and archivability, as well as political, infrastructural, and socio-­ economic implications. Definitions of relevant concepts can be found in the sociology of culture or the body (cf. Featherstone et  al., 1991; Turner, 1997² (1984);

Introduction

xv

Shusterman, 2005; Gugutzer, 2006). The same applies to concepts from the field of movement or dance studies, in particular from the sociology of movement and dance studies (especially Brandstetter & Wulf, 2007; Alkemeyer, 2009; Carter, 2006; Thomas, 2003, Klein, 2004; Gehm et al., 2007; Huschka, 2009). For the discussion of the notions of the performative in relation to practices, objects, related processes, and meanings, the publications on Agentieller Realismus (Agential Realism) (Barad, 2012) and on Bewegungsmaterial (movement material) (Kelter & Skrandies, 2016) prove to be fundamental. Research with a corresponding argumentation on intangible cultural heritage, in particular on performative and dance practices, has hardly been developed yet. One reason for this is that the subject area is still relatively new, and another is the still noticeable marginality of the themes of dance, and the notions of processuality and ephemerality. In the European context in particular, publications and project readers on these aspects can be found in the German-speaking contexts of dance and cultural studies (especially Fleischle-Braun et al., 2017; Odenthal, 2019; Klein, 2019a, b should be mentioned), as well as studies that discuss categorisations, fixing or freezing, and processes of institutionalisation in this context (Kämpfe, 2018; Stepputat, 2014, among others). At the same time, a discourse is developing around corresponding forms of transmission and safeguarding. Approaches to new types of collection and exhibition formats of cultural practices were realised by Mauss and de Maré, for example, as early as the beginning of the twentieth century, thus laying the foundation for the wider sociology of the body and culture. Building on this, research in dance studies (in the German-speaking context) and performative studies is currently focusing on the development of concepts of performative archives and practice as research. The aforementioned TANZPLAN initiative, TANZFONDS ERBE, and the conceptually very advanced studies and projects implemented within the framework of SAPA Swiss and PANCH Performance Art Network in Switzerland have made an important contribution here. In both the North and South American research discourse, critical statements on the concept of intangible cultural heritage are more strongly represented (Blake, 2000; Ruggles, 2009), especially also in connection with already completed nominations of cultural practices (Garcia-Canclini, 1999; Gómez-Schettini, 2011; Morel, 2009). For the German-speaking regions, reference is made in this context to the studies of the UNESCO Chair for Cultural Heritage as well as to the network-like publications of the Institute Heritage Studies under the direction of Prof. Dr. Marie-Theres Albert. The discourse on the new topics of dance practices and dance heritage, in particular, demonstrates that research is also a constantly changing process. Research itself is a differentiated exercise of academic practice. Until now, research has been based primarily on theoretical concepts and proven methods or ways of thinking. However, research can also be determined as a process that is (re)defining itself (cf. in Haarmann, 2019, pp. 267–271). Just like hermeneutics always aligns its ways of thinking anew with what is to be thought about, research processes should generally be assigned to their object of study in just as adequate a manner. This means that for some subjects of study new approaches are necessary. This becomes particularly obvious when dealing with fleeting and non-verbal contexts, of which dance

xvi

Introduction

practice is the best example. In this way, research admits to be practice and acts with practices. Practice as research is the buzzword for novel ways of knowing (Bippus, 2010; Quinten & Schroedter, 2016; Haarmann, 2019). This simultaneously raises epistemological and methodological questions. The main concern is to what extent and in what way findings from research in practice can be classified and integrated into existing knowledge systems. Furthermore, it must be clarified to what extent and in what way translations from embodied knowledge into cognitive knowledge must or can be carried out, but also what kind of knowledge and cognition research in practice makes accessible. Gehm et al. (2007) provide a comprehensive introduction to these fundamental questions regarding research in dance and dance practices. Concrete aspects of dance practice or research in dance practice, especially with regard to a further development based on practical experience, are dealt with in Quinten and Schroedter (2016) as well as in individual contributions to the 2019 and 2020 annuals of the Gesellschaft für Tanzforschung (Society for Dance Research). Valuable argumentations and conceptual developments can be found above all in the publications on artistic research. This is in no small part due to the fact that the artistic field has always been able to maintain a certain practical and intellectual autonomy. Key references include Barone and Eisner (2012) as well as conceptually more in-depth works by Bippus (2010) and Haarmann (2019). Equally noteworthy are the insightful observations in the anthology by Huber et al. (2020). This publication situates itself in this context. Based on previous studies, a range of arguments is developed using the example of dance heritage. Drawing on the discussion of some more fundamental and other more in-depth aspects, as well as the experiences from research in practice, new impulses can be introduced and practical approaches critically comprehended.

References Bibliography Alkemeyer, T., Brümmer, K., Kodalle, R., & Pille, T. (Eds.). (2009). Ordnung in Bewegung. Choreographien des Sozialen. Körper in Sport, Tanz, Arbeit und Bildung. transcript. Barad, K. (2012). Agentieller Realismus. Über die Bedeutung materiell-diskursiver Praktiken. Suhrkamp. Barone, T., & Eisner, E. W. (2012). Arts-based research. Sage. Bippus, E. (2010). Zwischen Systematik und Neugierde. Die epistemische Praxis künstlerischer Forschung. Gegenworte, 23, S.20–S.25. Bischof, M., & Rosiny, C. (Eds.). (2010). Konzepte der Tanzkultur. Wissen und Wege der Tanzforschung. transcript. Blake, J. (2000). On defining the cultural heritage. International and Comparative Law Quarterly, 49, 61–85. Brandstetter, G., & Klein, G. (Eds.). (2006). Bewegung in Übertragung. Methodische Überlegungen am Beispiel von Le Sacre du Printemps. transcript. Brandstetter, G., & Wulf, C. (Eds.). (2007). Tanz als Anthropologie. Fink. Carter, A. (Ed.). (2006). The Routledge dance studies reader. Routledge.

Introduction

xvii

Desmond, J.  C. (Ed.). (20064). Meaning in motion. New cultural studies of dance. Duke University Press. Diehl, I., & Lampert, F. (Eds.). (2011). Tanztechniken 2010 – Tanzplan Deutschland. Henschel. Featherstone, M., Hepworth, M., & Turner, B.  S. (Eds.). (1991). The body. Social process and cultural theory. Sage. Fischer-Lichte, E. (20163). Performativität. Eine Einführung. transcript. Fleischle-Braun, C., Obermaier, K., & Temme, D. (Eds.). (2017). Zum immateriellen Kulturerbe des Modernen Tanzes. Konzepte – Konkretisierungen – Perspektiven. transcript. Funke-Wieneke, J., & Klein, G. (Eds.). (2008). Bewegungsraum und Stadtkultur. Sozial- und Kulturwissenschaftliche Perspektiven. transcript. Garcia Canclini, N. (1999). Los usos sociales del Patrimonio Cultural. Aguilar Criado Encarnación. In Cuadernos Patrimonio Etnológico. Nuevas perspectivas de estudio (pp. 16–33). Consejería de Cultura, Junta de Andalucía. Gehm, S., Husemann, P., & von Wilcke, K. (Eds.). (2007). Wissen in Bewegung. Perspektiven der künstlerischen und wissenschaftlichen Forschung im Tanz. transcript. Gesellschaft für Tanzforschung e.V. (2020). newsletter#5 (5). Gómez Schettini, M., Almirón, A., & González Bracco, M. (2011). La cultura como recurso turístico de las ciudades. El caso de la patrimonialización del tango en Buenos Aires, Argentina. Estudios y Perspectivas en Turismo, 20, 1027–1046. Gugutzer, R. (Ed.). (2006). body turn. Perspektiven der Soziologie des Körpers und des Sports. transcript. Haarmann, A. (2019). Artistic Research. Eine epistemologische Ästhetik. transcript. Huber, A., Ingrisch, D., Kaufmann, T., Kretz, J., Schröder, G., & Zembylas, T. (Eds.). (2020). Knowing in performing. Artistic research in music and the performing arts. transcript. Huschka, S. (Ed.). (2009). Wissenskultur Tanz. Historische und zeitgenössische Vermittlungsakte zwischen Praktiken und Diskursen. transcript. Kämpfe, V. (2018). Kulturerbe Tango. Tanz, Politik und Kulturindustrie. transcript. Kelter, K., & Skrandies, T. (Eds.). (2016). Bewegungsmaterial. Produktion und Materialität in Tanz und Performance. transcript. Klein, G. (Ed.). (2004). Bewegung. Sozial- und kulturwissenschaftliche Konzepte. transcript. Klein, G. (2019a). Pina Bausch und das Tanztheater. Die Kunst des Übersetzens. transcript. Klein, G. (Ed.). (2019b2). Choreografischer Baukasten. Das Buch. transcript. Leigh Foster, S. (Ed.). (1996). Corporealities. Dancing knowledge, culture and power. Routledge. Leigh Foster, S. (Ed.). (2009). Worlding dance. Palgrave Macmillan. McFee, G. (1992). Understanding dance. Routledge. Morel, H. (2009). El giro patrimonial del tango: políticas oficiales, turismo y campeonatos de baile en la ciudad de Buenos Aires. Cuadernos de Antropología Social N° 30, 155–172. Odenthal, J. (2019). Das Jahrhundert des Tanzes. Ein Reader. Alexander Verlag. Parviainen, J. (2002). Bodily knowledge: Epistemological reflections on dance. Dance Research Journal, 1(34), 11–26. Quinten, S., & Schroedter, S. (Eds.). (2016). Tanzpraxis in der Forschung  – Tanz als Forschungspraxis. Choreographie – Improvisation – Exploration. transcript. Reed, S. A. (1998). The politics and poetics of dance. Annual Review of Anthropology, 27, 503–532. Ruggles, D. F., & Silverman, H. (Eds.). (2009). Intangible heritage embodied. Springer. Sheets-Johnstone, M. (1999). The primacy of movement. John Benjamins Publishing Company. Shusterman, R. (2005). Leibliche Erfahrung in Kunst und Lebensstil. Akademie. Stepputat, K. (2014). Tango, the not quite intangible cultural heritage. In E. I. Dunin (Ed.), Dance, narratives, heritage. Dance as intangible and tangible cultural heritage. 28th Symposium ICTM Study Group on Ethnochoreology: Korcula, Croatia (pp. 334–341) Thomas, H. (2001). Dance, modernity and culture. Explorations in the sociology of dance. Routledge. Thomas, H. (2003). The body, dance and cultural theory. Palgrave Macmillan. Turner, B. S. (19972). The body and society. Explorations in social theory. Sage.

Contents

1

 The Cultural Heritage of Dance and Research Practice����������������������    1 1.1 Insights into Intangible Heritage and Research Methods ����������������    1 1.1.1 Intangible Heritage – Developing a Vision as Concept and Convention ��������������������������������������������������������������������    1 1.1.2 Cultural Forms of Expression – Constitutive and Performative ������������������������������������������������������������������    7 1.1.3 Performative Methods – Empractical Processes and Practice as Research������������������������������������������������������   15 1.2 Intangible Cultural Heritage and Dance Practice in the German Context����������������������������������������������������������������������   22 1.2.1 Inscription Process for Modern Expressive Dance ��������������   25 1.2.2 Transmission and Further Development of Dance Heritage in the Present����������������������������������������������������������   27 1.3 Case Study on the Intangible Cultural Heritage of Tango����������������   31 1.3.1 Theory of Practice����������������������������������������������������������������   32 1.3.2 Power of Practice������������������������������������������������������������������   33 References��������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������   40

2

 The Intangible in the Context of Performative Situations ������������������   43 2.1 Perspectives on the Intangible����������������������������������������������������������   43 2.1.1 The Intangible in the Terms of the UNESCO Convention����������������������������������������������������������������������������   43 2.1.2 The Intangible as Implicit Knowledge and Performative Process������������������������������������������������������   45 2.1.3 The Intangible in the Perspective of the Performative����������   49 2.2 Dance Practices and the Designation as Intangible��������������������������   51 2.2.1 Symbolic Value of Dance Practices��������������������������������������   51 2.2.2 Attributes Assigned to the Intangible: Ephemerality and Presence�������������������������������������������������������������������������   52 2.2.3 Snapshot Dance��������������������������������������������������������������������   54

xix

xx

Contents

2.3 Movement Material in Performative Processes of Becoming����������   55 2.3.1 Materiality and Mediality ����������������������������������������������������   55 2.3.2 Materiality of the Intangible ������������������������������������������������   57 References��������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������   59 3

 Performative Doing as a Living Archive of Cultural Practices������������   61 3.1 Movement as Value and Knowledge Order of the Intangible ����������   61 3.1.1 A Moved and Moving Research Discourse��������������������������   62 3.1.2 Functional Modes of Movement Practices���������������������������   67 3.2 Archiving Incorporated Knowledge��������������������������������������������������   69 3.2.1 Archiving Concepts��������������������������������������������������������������   70 3.2.2 Notation Systems for Dance Movements�����������������������������   74 3.2.3 Dance Literacy����������������������������������������������������������������������   84 3.3 On the Value of Dance Heritage in the Present: Modern Expressive Forms and Contemporary Ways of Working������������������   88 References��������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������   92

4

 Performative Methods as an Approach to Dance Practice������������������   95 4.1 Dance Knowledge – Danced Knowledge ����������������������������������������   96 4.1.1 Concepts Related to Dance Practice ������������������������������������   96 4.1.2 Importance of Dance Practices in the Social Context����������  100 4.2 Approaches to Dance Practice����������������������������������������������������������  108 4.2.1 (In)tangible Implications of Dance Moments ����������������������  109 4.2.2 Physical-Aesthetic Qualities in Dance����������������������������������  112 4.2.3 Dancing as Thinking Space��������������������������������������������������  114 4.3 Safeguarding and Transmission of Dance Knowledge ��������������������  116 4.3.1 Knowledge Within the Performative������������������������������������  116 4.3.2 Concepts for Archiving the Performative ����������������������������  118 References��������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������  124

5

 The Living Heritage of Dance: Dance Archives in Practice����������������  127 5.1 Dance Archives as an Approach to Dance Practices – Performative and Empractical����������������������������������������  127 5.2 The Performative Dance Archive – Research in Practice ����������������  129 5.2.1 Theoretical Perspectives of Access ��������������������������������������  129 5.2.2 Empractical Experience��������������������������������������������������������  130 5.2.3 Reconstruction Work������������������������������������������������������������  131 5.2.4 Movement Analysis According to Laban������������������������������  133 5.2.5 Research in Practice and Artistic Research��������������������������  136 5.2.6 Choreographic Work ������������������������������������������������������������  138 5.2.7 Reflection Matrix for the Empractical Approach������������������  141 5.3 (Un)Critical Aspects in Terms of the Scientific Nature of the Approach��������������������������������������������������������������������������������  142 References��������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������  144

Contents

6

xxi

 Conclusion: Perspectives for the Living Heritage of Dance����������������  145 6.1 Arguments for a Living Heritage of Dance��������������������������������������  145 6.2 The Oxymoron of the Intangible or What to Do with the Dance Heritage?������������������������������������������������������������������  149 References��������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������  151

List of Figures

Fig. 3.1 Feuillet-Beauchamp notation the first image of the Bourée d’Achille. (Source: https://earlydance.org/content/6415-­la-­ bourree-­dachilles (last access: 27.01.2021))��������������������������������������  77 Fig. 3.2 Sténochorégraphie. (Source: https://www.ausstellungen. deutsche-­digitale-­bibliothek.de/tanz/exhibits/show/das-­ gedaechtnis-­des-­tanzes/tanzschreibekunst (last accessed: 27.01.2021))����������������������������������������������������������������������������������������  79 Fig. 3.3 Choreology. (Source: https://www.royalacademyofdance.org/ study/Benesh/the-­benesh-­institute-­and-­benesh-­movement-­notation (last accessed: 27.01.2021))����������������������������������������������������������������  80 Fig. 3.4 Eshkol-Wachmann Movement Notation: first page of the score of ‘Angels and Angels’ by Noa Eshkol 1989. (Source: https://www.noaeshkol.org/gallery/angles-and-angels/ (last access: 27.01.2021))��������������������������������������������������������������������  80 Fig. 3.5 Kinetogram of labanotation. (Source: Quinten & Schroedter, 2016, p. 78) ������������������������������������  81 Fig. 3.6 Motion capture. (Source: https://www.optitrack.com/products/ motive/body/indepth.html (last accessed: 27.01.2021)) ��������������������  83 Fig. 5.1 Room levels and movement axes according to Laban. (Source: http://le-­corpus.com/atlas/atlas-­space-­trace.html (last access: 27.01.2021))�������������������������������������������������������������������� 134

xxiii

Chapter 1

The Cultural Heritage of Dance and Research Practice

1.1 Insights into Intangible Heritage and Research Methods In this chapter, the current official understanding of intangible cultural heritage and cultural practices will be presented as an introduction to the subject area of the cultural heritage of dance and the associated research discourse. Moreover, theoretical positions and already developed methods to approach dance practice are named. Particular attention will be paid to the situation in German-speaking countries, where very innovative approaches within dance studies have emerged in the last 20  years. The discussion of a previously conducted case study on the intangible cultural heritage of tango, which was inscribed in 2009, will illustrate the problematic nature of theoretical positions and conceptualisations as well as of the current critical debate on the topic. Following this, some initial and more detailed approaches can be elaborated with regard to the argumentation of the present text.

1.1.1 Intangible Heritage – Developing a Vision as Concept and Convention This is not a competition for the most beautiful tradition […]. It is about appreciation and respect. Christoph Wulf: Grußwort zum Fachsymposium1

 Wulf, Christoph: Opening remarks at the symposium “Safeguarding and valuing intangible cultural heritage”. Available online: http//www.unesco.de/uho/1_2013_ike_rede_wulf_html.pdf=1 (last accessed: 14.11.2017). He continues: “If one wants to understand the special character of intangible cultural heritage, one must above all realise the central role played by the human body as its carrier. Human beings themselves are bearers of intangible cultural heritage and, through 1

© The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2023 V. Kämpfe, Dance Practices as Research, Heritage Studies, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-30581-8_1

1

2

1  The Cultural Heritage of Dance and Research Practice

1.1.1.1 Intangible Heritage in the Context of the World Heritage Concept The intangible heritage of humanity as a concept evolved from the discussion of the World Heritage concept. World Heritage has become a well-known good. At the same time, it is a construct based on international regulations and guidelines. These regulations and guidelines are negotiated and determined in the first instance by the institution UNESCO (Albert & Ringbeck, 2015, p. V). As one of the UN specialised agencies, UNESCO is active in the four programme sectors of education, science, culture, and communication. Under the heading of culture, the activities are committed to the protection of cultural heritage, the safeguarding of cultural diversity and the promotion of dialogue between cultures. The international legal framework for this is provided by the Convention for the Protection of the Diversity of Cultural Expressions (2005), the Convention for the Safeguarding of the Intangible Cultural Heritage (2003) and the Convention Concerning the Protection of the World Cultural and Natural Heritage (1972). The Convention for the Safeguarding of the Intangible Cultural Heritage, which is relevant to this study, was adopted by the UNESCO General Conference in October 2003. Its concern is to preserve the diversity of living cultural expressions as part of the cultural heritage of humanity. There are four main objectives. The first is the fundamental task of safeguarding the intangible cultural heritage. This is connected to ensuring respect for the intangible heritage of communities, groups, and individuals. It also aims to promote the appropriate awareness and recognition of the importance of intangible cultural heritage at local, national, and international levels. The implementation of these objectives is aimed at supporting international cooperation in the interests of peacekeeping.2 The Convention distinguishes between the following forms of intangible cultural heritage in defining-descriptive terms: • oral traditions and expressions, including language as a carrier of intangible cultural heritage (songs, legends, fairy tales, dialects); • performing arts (music, dance, different forms of theatre); • social customs, social practices, rituals, and festivals (parades, processions, carnivals, games); • knowledge and practices related to nature and the universe (healing methods, agricultural knowledge); • traditional craft techniques. It is characteristic for intangible cultural heritage that it is passed on from one generation to the next primarily in a bodily and oral manner. Moreover, it is continuously reshaped in this transmission process. Within the practicing communities, identity and continuity are conveyed through these processes (ibid.).

their actions, ensure the transmission of this heritage, the transmission of this knowledge from generation to generation.” ibid. 2  Cf. the text of the Convention for the Safeguarding of the Intangible Cultural Heritage. Article 2 Definitions. Available online: https://ich.unesco.org/en/convention (last access: 27.01.2021).

1.1  Insights into Intangible Heritage and Research Methods

3

This now valued cultural good of intangible cultural heritage was only able to gain this status through the long-lasting discussion of the previously proclaimed concept of World Heritage. The idea of World Heritage was subject to a conceptual development from the very beginning. In fact, as it is presented in the preface to the publication on the 40th anniversary of the World Heritage Convention in the Heritage Studies series, it represents a construct that is constantly renegotiated: it “does not exist per se; it is rather a reflection of the criteria for justification of the inscription of a site for its Outstanding Universal Value (OUV), together with the criteria of authenticity and integrity as stipulated in the World Heritage Convention” (Albert & Ringbeck, 2015, p. V). A statement that is equally valid for the continuing discussion on intangible cultural heritage. Yet at the same time, these well-reasoned criteria as well as the associated discourses, argumentations and final definitions are influenced by social changes. Thus, not only is cultural practice as the subject of the respective UNESCO Conventions undergoing constant change, but the conceptual determinations themselves are constantly changing, too. The following section will therefore trace the developments of the concept of World Heritage, from which the idea of intangible cultural heritage ultimately derived, in its historical and discursive context. The search and struggle for adequate terminology, definitions of values, criteria, procedures, and mechanisms will become apparent. The conventions and accompanying documents strive to do justice to the goal of preserving the World Heritage of humankind in an appropriate and meaningful way. Criticism, argumentation, discussions, and adjustments are thus everyday instruments of the protagonists concerned with its safeguarding. Generally, it can be stated that, starting from the certainly idealistic concern of determining and preserving a heritage of humanity, it was, at the same time, to a great extent governed by occidental or rather Eurocentric patterns of thought. This resulted in a rather narrow and static concept of culture. Due to the critical discussion accompanying the idea of World Heritage, however, the concepts were gradually broadened. Ultimately, it was possible to develop the currently applied, open, process-oriented concept of cultural heritage that includes so-called intangible values3 (Albert & Ringbeck, 2015, p. 54/59). Starting with the 1954 Hague Convention for the Protection of Cultural Property in the Event of Armed Conflict, one of the main motivations for the initiation of the World Heritage concept, which overarched all subsequent conventions, was the acute experience of the two World Wars. It clearly highlighted the extent to which the destruction of cultural goods is representative for the destruction of human life, communal values, and social coexistence. With increasing stabilisation of the political situation, the value of cultural goods could be discussed further and determined beyond peaceful coexistence. For  The chapter Discourses Surrounding World Heritage in Albert & Ringbeck, 2015 is dedicated to a clear and compact outline of and commentary on the development of the concept of World Heritage, starting with its origins, moving on to the authorised discourse of an institutionalised concept, continuing with the non-authorised discourse as a processual, changeable concept, and ending with the so-called heritage-studies-discourse on the protection and use of World Heritage for human development. 3

4

1  The Cultural Heritage of Dance and Research Practice

example, aspects of integrity, ownership, authenticity, conservation measures and processes of understanding associated with cultural goods were taken into account in later declarations and conventions (Venice Charter 1964 and the Convention on the Means of Prohibiting and Preventing the Illicit Import, Export and Transfer of Ownership of Cultural Property 1970). Parallel to the emerging critical discourse on world politics as a result of armed conflicts, the first visible consequences of economic globalisation and environmental problems, the discussion on World Heritage became increasingly concerned with aspects of cultural identity and the urgent need for greater environmental awareness. This laid the foundation for the 1972 Convention Concerning the Protection of the World Cultural and Natural Heritage (Albert & Ringbeck, 2015, pp. 46–58). After an initial phase of implementation in the course of first nominations, increasing public awareness of the Convention, and first political conflicts, a second phase in the 1990s led to the first fundamental consolidation. It became apparent that there was a serious disparity between the inscription rates of countries in the Northern Hemisphere and the rest of the world, as well as a discrepancy between cultural and natural heritage sites. In order to address this, a document was adopted in 1994, the Global Strategy, which set out a continuous alignment with the criteria for selection and the Operational Guidelines, as well as with the broader concept of culture newly defined in the 1982 Mexico City Declaration. Alongside this, additional papers were drafted to broaden the terminology around cultural heritage. These include first and foremost the Document on Authenticity adopted in Nara, Japan, in 1994 and the Charter for Places of Cultural Significance adopted in Burra, Australia, in 1999. This changed the understanding of cultural heritage “from self-­ evident, tangible monumental heritage, to interpretations that increasingly sought to emphasize tangible heritage in the context of intangible meanings and functions [...]” (ibid., p. 76). Aggravated by the stagnation of the inscription practice and the increasing use (and also ever more obvious exploitation) of the World Heritage label in economic and political terms, the years after the turn of the millennium did not bring a real turnaround in the way the content of the Convention was to be implemented. At least, however, the aspect of the intangible values of cultural goods increasingly comes into play. In 2003, the Convention for the Safeguarding of the Intangible Cultural Heritage was finally adopted. Since then, there have been strong efforts on the part of UNESCO stakeholders to critically examine the implementation practices of the Conventions. The idealistic intention to raise awareness, safeguard and communicate the heritage of humankind, must be kept alive, and directed back onto the intended paths. Last but not least, it is a matter of strengthening the participatory idea on all levels of society and emphasising the responsibility of each individual (Albert & Ringbeck, 2015, pp. 61–82). What has been outlined so far with respect to World Heritage is equally true for intangible cultural heritage. In this context, there is an ongoing discussion on the effects of popularisation and a critical debate about the observable transformation of the World Heritage from an asset worthy of protection towards a commodity value. Both aspects especially refer to the often excessive use of cultural heritage for tourism and the political as well as economic exploitation of cultural

1.1  Insights into Intangible Heritage and Research Methods

5

goods. The general tenor of this critical discussion is that cultural heritage has come to stand for a national brand in a global context. Furthermore, it is used as a political instrument in international cooperation as well as in cultural policy strategies. There is also a tendency towards a general strategy of recognition (ibid., pp. 130–152). Such a development can only be counteracted by a continued open, direct, and ambitious debate about the understanding of the different concepts of World Heritage as well as about the procedures and the management of its safeguarding. 1.1.1.2 Cultural Heritage and the Concept of the Intangible In the following, the concepts and terms that have emerged from the development of the concept of cultural heritage will be named as an introduction to the argumentation regarding the intangible cultural heritage of dance.4 For this purpose, the underlying concept of culture will be addressed first. As explained above, the conceptual definitions of UNESCO that are valid at the present time and laid down in the conventions and documents are subject to constant debate and transformation within the internal framework. This applies equally to the concept of culture. With the Mexico City Declaration (1982), the following definition of culture was used within the UNESCO context: “[…] in its widest sense, culture may now be said to be the whole complex of distinctive, spiritual, material, intellectual and emotional features that characterize a society or social group. It includes not only arts and letters, but also ways of life, fundamental rights of the human being, value systems, traditions and beliefs” (Mexico City Declaration on Cultural Policy).5 This broad concept of culture includes any form of cultural expression of a community, as well as its values and norms. Every form of cultural practice is included in this, performed by both individuals as well as cultural organisations. Culture is the epitome of all that humankind has created. Previously, the understanding of culture was oriented towards the distinctive determination of art or high culture versus popular culture. Furthermore, in the same declaration, the identity-forming and above all social function of culture was also established, when it was stated “that it is culture that gives man the ability to reflect upon himself. It is culture that makes us specifically human, rational beings, endowed with a critical judgment and a sense of

 A compact overview and commentary on the development starting from the new focus of the concept of culture in the Mexico City Declaration, followed by the Recommendation on the Safeguarding of Traditional Culture and Folklore, the programmes Masterpieces of Humanity, Memory of the World and Cultural Landscapes as well as the study Creative Diversity, up to the Convention of 2003, can be found in the chapter World Heritage versus Intangible Cultural Heritage in Albert & Ringbeck, 2015. 5  Cited in UNESCO: Mexico City Declaration on Cultural Policy (1982). Available online: https:// unesdoc.unesco.org/ark:/48223/pf0000054668?posInSet=4&queryId=N-­E XPLORE-­9 e 44ce96-4011-4b66-b019-cc06ac4de352 (last access: 27.01.2021) 4

6

1  The Cultural Heritage of Dance and Research Practice

moral commitment. It is through culture that we discern values and make choices […]” (Mexico City Declaration on Cultural Policy).6 In a way, this broad concept of culture was corrected and completed by the UNESCO ‘World Culture Report 2000’. The report refers to culture as a constant and complex process that must be considered. It declares an understanding of culture that is not primarily based on the safeguarding of existing culture, but on a permanent change in culture. It is no longer the main goal to protect culture and to preserve cultural treasures. It was recognised that it can no longer be just a matter of preserving the current state or a traditional way of practicing cultural heritage and thus protecting it from change. The aim is rather to promote and maintain a living cultural heritage. In this sense, the term “protection of cultural property” was consistently replaced by the term “safeguarding” in the 2003 Convention. Following the wording of the Convention, this means taking measures aimed at ensuring the viability of the intangible cultural heritage and which are therefore to be classified as dynamic elements. Safeguarding presupposes the identification of the heritage, its documentation and research into the possibilities of its safeguarding, as well as its transmission through formal and informal education (Albert & Ringbeck, 2015, p. 165). Accordingly, “The Convention considers intangible cultural heritage to be a hands-on and dynamic aspect of the identity of communities, groups and individuals, which in its overall processuality is to be further implemented and promoted in practical terms” (ibid.). Thus, all measures adopted for the safeguarding should aim to ensure the viability of intangible cultural heritage in its dynamic and transformable character. Under no circumstances should this lead to the feared musealisation of cultural elements. Consequently, the requested safeguarding should in no way lead to the suppression of new impulses or of further developments of cultural expressions (cf. Memorandum of the DUK, 2007a). What is remarkable about this conceptual debate is the parallelism of this discussion with the discourses within cultural and dance studies regarding the possible handling of performative situations and the processuality of social conditions (Fischer-Lichte, 2016; Haarmann, 2019; Hörning & Reuter, 2004; Klein, 2004, among others). The starting point of the growing criticism directed at the concept of cultural heritage is the allocation of cultural elements to either the tangible or intangible category. In this controversy over the definitions of the tangible and the intangible, it became apparent that cultural elements cannot be recorded and safeguarded in isolation. This, in consequence, calls into question whether the separation of materiality and immateriality can be maintained at all. The two labels as tangible and intangible cannot be imagined separately outside of an abstracting logical reflection (see Sect. 2.2 for more detail). The acting human being is directly bound to both dimensions. The fundamental argument for this is that no element functions solely as a tangible or intangible component. This is illustrated by the practices of dance and song. They are both characterised as a body-bound action, since the body is  Cited in UNESCO: Mexico City Declaration on Cultural Policy (1982). Available online: https:// unesdoc.unesco.org/ark:/48223/pf0000054668?posInSet=4&queryId=N-­EXPLORE-­9e44ce 96-4011-4b66-b019-cc06ac4de352 (last access: 27.01.2021). 6

1.1  Insights into Intangible Heritage and Research Methods

7

used as a means for movement or for resonance, respectively. Furthermore, they are tied to material and spatial elements such as clothes, musical scores, instruments, and localities, as well as to certain constellations of spatial, temporal, and material elements. Buildings and monuments are another example. They only become significant for individual or collective perception through narratives. It is these narratives that establish the functional and symbolic value of their construction and use. Consequently, the concept of the intangible, in particular of intangible heritage, does not only refer to intellectual ideas, concepts, world views, systems of norms or linguistic modes of communication, but in particular to practices, forms of representation and expression with their immanent knowledge and skills, which belong to the intangible cultural heritage. This also includes the instruments, objects and cultural spaces associated with the respective intangible cultural heritage. Furthermore, the implementation of the Convention’s content is about the actors taking responsibility. This means, on the one hand, the political and institutional actors, and on the other hand, the participation of the practitioners of cultural practices. They should be involved in the public as well as the professional debate. This is the only way to identify and address the potentials and shortcomings of past and present developments. The safeguarding of heritage, as Albert/Ringbeck already pointed out, is an eminently political, participatory, and interdisciplinary act (ibid. 2015, p. 2). In the course of the argumentation in this study, the aspects mentioned from the critical discussion concerning intangible cultural heritage will be supplemented to include the aspects of the associated institutional processes as well as the constellations of interests and power, using the case study of tango. In addition, the concepts of performativity, materialities and agentiality from the discourse in cultural studies and dance studies are discussed in order to determine to what extent they can be useful arguments in the discussion about intangible cultural heritage.

1.1.2 Cultural Forms of Expression – Constitutive and Performative Because it reflects our life. Life is movement. If you stop moving, you are dead. John Neumeier in stern 64/9, p. 118

When we speak of intangible cultural heritage, we are primarily talking about cultural expressions. In accordance with the specifications of intangible heritage formulated in the Convention text, it includes artefacts, places, and forms of knowledge associated with the forms of expression. Thus, the UNESCO Convention already provides a broad concept of cultural practices. Based on these specifications, it is possible to include the most diverse levels of relationships of the practitioners, be they personal, socio-structural, sacred or cultic, economic and, last but not least, political, in the reflections about cultural expressions. Following the determinations, the processes of performing, mediating, and changing can then be perceived. In the next section, two approaches are presented that make it possible to analyse and describe cultural expressions in such an understanding.

8

1  The Cultural Heritage of Dance and Research Practice

1.1.2.1 Cultural Expressions in a Praxeological Understanding A constructive approach for the understanding of cultural forms of expression within the framework of the discourse within cultural and dance studies is the definition of practices according to Bourdieu. His praxeological approach is considered to be one of the approaches of practice theories. Their aim is to understand practices by working out the underlying structures of their formation and functioning. They are based on the so-called practice turn. The preceding cultural turn and the subsequent practical turn represent a paradigm shift within theories of science. It is no longer a matter of establishing a rule-based cause-and-effect sequence for the object of research or of deciphering interrelated signs and meanings by interpreting them. Instead, social or cultural practices are analysed with a focus on the mechanisms of their functioning (Reckwitz, 2008, pp. 356–361). It is characteristic of the practical turn that practices are consistently placed at the level of practice. This means that the analytical categories of space, time and body-boundness of the practices carried out, as well as their processes of emergence and change, are of fundamental importance for comprehending social situations. In addition, practice-bound knowledge is presupposed. They include intuitive and emotional knowledge, learning processes (learning by doing), incorporated forms of knowledge (embodied knowledge), but also knowledge acted out in practices (performed knowledge) (Hörning & Reuter, 2004, p. 239/240; Alkemeyer et al., 2009, pp. 10–12). The intention of the praxeological approach is to capture and understand the underlying relationships and properties of all elements in the social space as well as the practices carried out within it. The aim is not only to describe the object of research, but also to reveal the interdependencies and the variations of meaning that arise from it, as well as the possibilities of acting that are given therein. The object of research is to be analysed comprehensively and almost free of pre-constructed concepts. The theories of field and habitus form the framework of the praxeological approach. With regard to cultural expressions the assumption that social structures are found incorporated in actors through certain processes and are put into practice in the form of actions proves to be particularly significant. These processes include, for example, social mechanisms of reproduction such as education, public discourse formation, the social dynamics of group and their modes of action. Actions equally include bodily, linguistic, and symbolic practices (Kämpfe, 2018, p. 28–30/p. 38). In order to understand Bourdieu’s starting points for understanding cultural expressions, field and habitus theories are briefly presented in their basic terms. Bourdieu defines the basic theoretical concept of his field theory with the field as a network of positions that are related to each other. Each position is determined by its potential properties. These emerge through the development of the field. They determine the position in the network of relations and its relation to all other positions in it. The relations develop depending on the distribution of forms of capital. These are to be understood as economic, social, or symbolic values that can be assigned to positions. These relations are ultimately defined as power relations and the resulting hierarchies within the field. The actions (practices) of the holders of the individual positions (actors) correspond to their potential characteristics

1.1  Insights into Intangible Heritage and Research Methods

9

(dispositions) and their positioning (situs) within the network of relations. Relations, positions, and practices are in a permanent interrelation. Furthermore, all actors within a field have specific interests in common. Each position has these field interests. In addition, further interests are assigned to each position, which solely correspond to that particular position. With regard to a functioning coexistence of all actors, as well as to the assertion of individual interests, these interests determine the way in which practices are carried out. In their totality, they form the mechanisms for the reproduction and development of the given structures (Bourdieu, 1993, p. 107–114; Bourdieu & Wacquant, 2006, pp. 124–147).7,8 With the theory of habitus, Bourdieu develops a complex approach for understanding the behaviour and actions of different actors.9 This means understanding the practices carried out in the way that they are executed, their modes of production as well as their function within the social context. Practices are always embedded in a social field as described by field theory. Practices are a constitutive part of this network of relations. Its structures are inscribed in the bodies of the actors in the sense of a lex insita. Thus, actors act in coordination with the field structures and at the same time reproduce them through their actions (Bourdieu & Wacquant, 2006, pp. 148–154; Bourdieu, 1987, pp. 122–126, among others). Habitus theory aims to understand how social practice originates and how actors perceive it, experience it, recognise it, evaluate it and, by extension, generate it. In this sense, it considers itself both as a “theory of the modes in which practices are created” and as a “theory of the practical knowledge of the social world” (Bourdieu, 1976, pp. 164/148). Bourdieu defines the term habitus as the categories of perception and action internalised through processes of social reproduction. It is through these transmitted categories of perception that the actor experiences the social world, interprets and evaluates it, in order to act meaningfully on the basis of the actor’s own categories of action. In the interplay of bodily inscriptions in the form of a certain body schema (hexis) and in the belief in the values immanent to the structure of the field (illusio), the habitus enables the actors to behave appropriately in relation to both their own  Every actor in a field who holds a position or assumes such a position upon entering the field, stands in a certain relationship of recognition to these interests. The actor must be able to assign them the field-specific value. This is the only way to secure the recognition of the other actors and thus membership to the field. In this way, it is ensured that the field continues to exist, in that the actors do not question the interests within the field structures. Cf. Bourdieu, 1993, pp. 107–114. 8  The concept of the field allows for an analysis of a social structure that is subject to a specific interest tied to time and place. If the interest of analysis lies in the representation of a defined society (for example, a nation, cultural community, or geographically limited group), then Bourdieu speaks of a social space. For more details, see Bourdieu, 1992b, pp. 135–154; Bourdieu, 2001, pp. 210–245. 9  Bourdieu sidesteps the concept of action in his work. In the academic discourse, action stands for intentional action on the part of conscious subjects in the sense of a finalistic or mechanistic mode of explanation. In contrast, Bourdieu defines action as an enactment of structural relations. (Bourdieu, 1993, pp.  107–114) Elsewhere, Bourdieu states, “The habitus is this generative and unifying principle that retranslates the intrinsic and relational characteristics of a position into a unitary lifestyle, that is, into the unitary ensemble of persons, goods, and practices chosen by an actor for himself.” Bourdieu, 1998, p. 21/22. 7

10

1  The Cultural Heritage of Dance and Research Practice

individual interests and the field interest. The actor might be aware of this, but for the most part it functions as a vague impulse to act behind the intentions for action formulated by the actor.10 Bourdieu understands habitus as a kind of conditioning. He observes a stylistic uniformity (lifestyle) between actors who occupy similar positions in the field and have thus internalised similar schemata. Over the course of his analyses, Bourdieu differentiates between various mechanisms that are responsible for the habitus being a relatively stable matrix of behaviour that is passed on according to the interests of the field. These include the social mechanisms of reproduction already mentioned, such as upbringing, education, public discourse formation and interactions in social groups (Bourdieu, 1976). Bourdieu’s work provides suitable starting points for approaching the field of cultural expressions, it especially contributes to the discussion of so-called ephemeral qualities and intangible values. He characterises social structures with the three basic properties of spatiality, temporality and body-boundness. Furthermore, they represent relatively stable networks of relationships that are subject to constant and ongoing change due to their permanent interdependencies. The behaviours and forms of practice that can be observed are bound to the prevailing understanding of time and space and to the way in which corporeality is dealt with. The concept of habitus takes this into account by first describing behaviours and forms of practices as observable at the individual level of the actor, but also by understanding them as inscriptions in the body, conditioned by the characteristics of the field. Thus, social structures are implemented in practice by means of body-bound actions as observable practices. Bourdieu further differentiates these properties. He uses the term space in several senses: as a metaphor for his theoretical concept of field, as a spatial image of an analysed social situation, and as the physical space of practical actions (Bourdieu, 2001, p. 167/168). On the basis of his analyses, Bourdieu is able to demonstrate that the positioning of actors in the physical space corresponds to the analysed structural image of their social position (ibid., pp. 173–189). Bourdieu further defines two temporalities in terms of two concepts of time. One perspective of temporality captures the present moment. It results from the chronological sequence. In this perspective, every moment of the past is determinant for the present moment. Thus, the present moment already contains the possibilities for development and options for action of all subsequent moments in time (Bourdieu & Wacquant, 2006, p. 172/173). The actor’s individual perception of time is limited to the actor himself as a part of his habitus and at the same time conditioned by the surrounding structures. The actor operates without a comprehensive overview of past and parallel moments; for moments to come he can only consciously or

 Bourdieu describes agency starting from the conditionings of the existing structures of the social space, which are linked to the conditions of existence of the actors: they “generate the habitus forms as systems of durable and transferable dispositions, as structuring structures that are created as if to function as such, that is, as generating and ordering bases for practices and ideas that can be objectively adapted to their goal, without, however, presupposing conscious aspiration to ends and explicit mastery of the operations required to achieve them.” Bourdieu, 1976, p. 98/99. 10

1.1  Insights into Intangible Heritage and Research Methods

11

unconsciously anticipate possible effects (Bourdieu, 1987, pp. 147–179).11 This is contrasted with the temporality of scholarly work and historicising writing. The analyses take a past event as their starting point. This allows the analyser to take an all-encompassing perspective for studying the situation. The actual time of practice is set aside and inserted into an analytical scheme of a temporal sequence (Bourdieu, 2001, p. 265).12 In relation to performed practices, Bourdieu draws attention to the inevitable presence of the body. The actor is shaped by the habitus in terms of the incorporated structural conditions. The bodies are shaped in the way they move, in their posture and physique, and in the potential possibilities of their movement options. These body schemata include postures and bodily movements (hexis), but also articulations such as speech, gestures, and responses of the affective (specific habitus forms), as well as mental and cognitive dispositions (habitus). For Bourdieu, actor and practice are not opposites that influence each other, he rather suggests a dialectical interconnectedness of actors, structures, and body-mediated dispositions (Bourdieu, 2001, pp. 177–181; Bourdieu, 1987, pp. 122–131).13, 14 Following this, Bourdieu formulates some first suggestions for an understanding of materiality. On the one hand, structural conditions are found embodied in the actors through habitus

 Bourdieu makes it clear that the field structures determine the actors’ perception of time and their behaviour. These include time schedules such as calendars, vacation periods, holidays, regulations for opening and rest times, but also body rhythms and movement dynamics. Bourdieu, 1998, p. 117. 12  The concept of time in the scientific work legitimised in the academic field is that of the scholastic point of view. Characteristically, time is seen as “a given reality that exists in itself and is prior or external to practice.” Ibid. This insight leads to the epistemological question of how scientific knowledge relates to practice and what knowledge there can be about practice. Cf. Bourdieu: Social Meaning, p. 149. 13  He includes corporeality as constitutive of practice as a theoretical concept in his later works, especially in the Meditations (Bourdieu, 2001). In his reflections on the function of corporeality, Bourdieu starts from the reflection on the ‘thing body’ as a purely biological mechanism. He rejects the paradigm of body-mind separation with regard to the concept of knowledge. Descartes’ thought experiment of a categorical body-mind separation has long been used paradigmatically in this reduction. Descartes himself, however, used it only as an analytical-philosophical moment, in order to subsequently abolish the theoretically conceived separation with the concept of the soul as the necessarily encompassing and unifying factor for human activity. Thoughts and texts that he, however, could not publish due to the strong criticism in the context of the Inquisition, but that can be found in correspondences, while he led his way of thinking to a more compliant argument for the existence of God. Cf. for the methodical approach to the body-mind separation in Descartes: Meditations on First Philosophy 1641 (Reclam 2005) as well as the conception of the soul as a necessary body-mind unifying component in Descartes: Letters 1629–1650 (Staufen 1949). Bourdieu goes on to state the necessity of including the physical in the cognitive process. The dialectical interconnectedness cannot be grasped in purely material and spatial categories of rational logic, but must be grasped with other categories, taking embodiment and corporeality into account. Bourdieu provides the concepts of habitus, hexis, practical sense, illusio and space of possibilities for this purpose. Cf. Bourdieu, 2001, p. 175ff. 14  Bourdieu introduces the bodily character of cognition, knowledge, and action. That which can be observed in a field is bound to bodily action by the actors through their motor, mental, emotional, or sensitive schemata. Cf. Bourdieu, 2001, ibid. 11

12

1  The Cultural Heritage of Dance and Research Practice

forms. A second form of materialisation is found in things and artefacts. They imply a history of the field archived within them (Bourdieu, 2001, pp. 265–316). From this perspective, cultural forms of expression represent the possible options for action and behaviour put into practice. They are determined by the structural conditions of a social space and are observable as relatively stable modes of perception and behaviour. It becomes clear that cultural forms of expression at the same time constitute present reality and are this reality themselves. They are thus considered fundamental elements in the development and shaping of social conditions. This includes as a practice of movement in a special way, both as a popular and as an artistic or ritual practice. This is only hinted at in Bourdieu’s approaches and was elaborated in more detail within dance studies (in the German-speaking context) in the following years.15,16 1.1.2.2 Cultural Practices in a Performative Description In addition to this cultural sociological classification of cultural practices in the praxeological understanding, dance practices are highlighted from the perspective of dance studies for their performative character. Since the 1990s, the concept of the performative has increasingly been used in the context of theatre and cultural studies. There, based on the concept of performance (in the sense of performing for an audience), it primarily describes the performance character of cultural, in particular artistic-creative situations. The connotation of the term is initially based on the self-­ referentiality of artistic practices. Increasingly, this focus shifts to the simultaneously society-constituting power of artistic-performing practices (Fischer-Lichte, 2016, p. 29). As early as the 1970s, performance studies in the USA laid the foundation for this, especially with regard to the socio-critical and subversive potential of artistic action. In the discussion about the concept of culture, they raised the question of cultural dynamics and the corresponding options for constituting society in the artistic processes involved, especially in theatre work. As a consequence, the concept of the performative is increasingly used to overcome the merely indirect character of performance in the context of theatre productions. A more immediate concept of performance was developed, which describes the constitution of reality through the theatrical staging itself. This terminological development can be traced back to its etymological root and the most original meaning of to perform – to do, to act, to accomplish, to execute (ibid.). The concept of the performative was introduced into the scientific discourse by the linguist and semiotician John Austin in the 1950s. By means of the performative, he describes speech situations in which reality is constituted through authorised speech. The two examples most commonly used to illustrate this, are the two  Argued and with the relevant references to Bourdieu in Kämpfe, 2018, pp. 54–58.  Cf. Bourdieu’s essays Program for a Sociology of Sport in Speech and Answer (1992a, b), Historical and Social Preconditions of Modern Sport in Sociological Questions (1993), and Soil and Marriage Strategies in Social Sense (1987). 15 16

1.1  Insights into Intangible Heritage and Research Methods

13

situations of christening a ship or being married by the registrar (Fischer-Lichte, 2016, p. 37/38). Judith Butler, a cultural sociologist and founder of gender studies adopts this concept and, based on Austin’s pure speech act, develops it further to also include the bodily level. She uses performative processes to describe the constitution of reality and the reproductive character of human action itself, which is necessarily always body-bound. Performative acts as bodily action do not refer in any way to given essential conditions a priori – as would be the case, for example, with gender-specific labels and inscriptions – but rather constitute or reproduce values, characteristics and patterns of action, that are supposedly given in the act itself, in the function of an identity and role (ibid., pp. 41/42). Thus, the concept of the performative was able to emancipate itself from its concrete semiotically fixed understanding in speech act theory and move towards a strongly gender-connotated relativising understanding. Moreover, its indirect performance character expanded from theatre studies and performance studies. The performative now stands for a performative view of cultural processes in the discourse of cultural practices. Culture is thus freed from the stigma of value and being a representative form of expression and is understood as a dynamic process. The performative refers to “certain symbolic actions that do not express or represent something given, but rather produce the reality to which they refer. It comes into being as the action is performed” (ibid., p.  44). A performative act is to be thought of exclusively as an embodied act. Moreover, it is always to be understood as self-referential and reality-constituting. This provides new perspectives, especially for the philosophy of science Starting from a scientific interest in knowledge, the perspective of the performative on objects of knowledge or on situations and processes to be recognised means, as a consequence, posing the question of a new epistemology (ibid., p. 153). Particularly with regard to the philosophy of science itself, it should be recognised that scientific work is in itself a performative practice that functions simultaneously in a processual, body-bound, reality-constituting and ideally self-referential way. Especially because it is about gaining knowledge, scientific work cannot  – and it would be downright counterproductive – be based only on fixed ways of thinking and pre-­ planned methodological paths, but must allow for the emergence of scientific processes that make gaining knowledge and new kinds of knowledge possible in the first place. If only preconceived assumptions and theses are tested for plausibility, no gain in knowledge can take place. According to Fischer-Lichte’s argumentation, scientific work has always functioned as such dynamic-performative processes. In the history of science, research and knowledge transfer have always had a performance character. Science was and is public in the sense that lectures, discussion rounds, entire research experiments, showcase experiments, exhibitions, publications, etc. are addressed to a wide public where in the function of constituting their own reality and implementing their procedures, rules, and paradigms, they are exercised in a performative sense. Furthermore, experiments in the natural sciences by no means always repeat, let alone confirm, the same thing, but rather symbolise the (research) space for trying out, for failing, for functioning in an unplanned way and for producing new knowledge in these methodological gaps. Even the humanities

14

1  The Cultural Heritage of Dance and Research Practice

depend on these unexpected moments. Their laboratories are the texts, archives, and libraries. Their experimental setups consist of their assumptions and theses. In open processes of reading, finding, thinking, and assembling so far unthought aspects and factors are revealed; new assumptions, theses and procedures become necessary. Cognitive processes thus unfold as open performative processes of academic research (ibid., pp. 181–185). Haarmann refers to this when she understands performative-artistic processes already as research paradigms. She argues that spaces of performative-artistic practice such as studios, dance halls, exhibition and performance spaces correspond in principle to spaces of scientific work, such as research laboratories, libraries, and conference venues. They are equally structural and real spaces in which epistemic principles are negotiated. In a comparable way, performative-artistic processes draw on knowledge orders, on specific procedures, formats of presentation and forms of interaction. They function as enabling conditions for structural processes of knowledge formation and transmission as well as for further (creative) research processes. Thus, the central promises of research can be found in performative-artistic practice: the localisation of knowledge in field-specific and public contexts, the publication directed at a community of experts, and the debate about plausibility. Likewise, the demand of science for a conceptual and methodical approach is realised here, in that performances, performances, exhibitions and installations require conception and methodology to a particular degree (Haarmann, 2019, pp.  69–71). In her approach for a methodological recording of performative artistic practices, Haarmann highlights an additional consideration. In order to meet the methodological needs of performative practices in the research process, especially taking into account the performative-constituting condition of dance, art and research processes, a methodology cannot be determined a priori of the actual research process as a systematic canon of selected methods. It should rather evolve from the research situation, just like an autopoietic process of becoming. Haarmann describes a thoughtful methodology not only as a determining and coordinating set of rules in the sense of constriction and disciplining, but also as an accompanying, recapitulating, and corrective reflection. She goes as far as to suggest that methodology should only be determined as post modo of a research process – referring to a decidedly artistic practice  – methodically reflective in the sense of a thinking after the fact (ibid., pp. 283–287). Thus, methodological procedures would also be an integrative part of performative research processes, which are the methodical tools corresponding with the path towards knowledge. Here, Fischer-Lichte offers a conceptual link in her account of the concept of the performative. Based on the concept of the performative from the discourse in theatre studies, she develops manageable categories for further methodological work. This is also in order to support her demand for the necessity of such a performative perspective as part of any research in the humanities, if not in any scientific work. According to Fischer-Lichte, the performative is determined as a process in bodily or material co-presence, since a performative situation is tied to human, or at least material, existence. This process generates a self-referential reality in a constant feedback loop. The dynamics of this reality are characterised by the fact that the

1.1  Insights into Intangible Heritage and Research Methods

15

performer’s and the recipient’s perception and meaning-making co-determine the same reality in a constituting way. This generated reality materialises through the categories of corporeality or materiality, spatiality and phoneticity. Fischer-Lichte further specifies each category. Corporeality, for example, addresses the question of the materiality of bodies as well as the differentiation between corporeality and a semiotic body. Accordingly, spatiality also includes material, semiotic and sensitive aspects of the perception and creation of reality. Both categories stand for boundaries, limitations, and their dissolution. Interesting is the aspect of phoneticity, which is generally not taken into account. Although phoneticity usually creates the perception of physicality, materiality, and spatiality in the first place, it also has the potential to undermine or disrupt these categories. Ultimately, performative situations have reality-constituting characteristics that arise primarily from their processuality and eventfulness. They are the reason why performative situations – as they ultimately mean all cultural and social situations – have a transformative potential that challenges the philosophy of science (Fischer-Lichte, 2016, pp. 54–69). These are the methodological challenges that scientific research currently has to overcome and therefore should grant the performative perspective a permanent place within the framework of its methodology. How could such a nuanced determination function in terms of the philosophy of science? What concept of knowledge could be formulated for this purpose? What kind of methodological possibilities do already exist?

1.1.3 Performative Methods – Empractical Processes and Practice as Research It is a different kind of knowledge than the one we usually accept as rational, technical or discursive knowledge. [...] The knowledge that is revealed and transmitted in dances and choreographies is dynamic: a bodily-sensory and implicit knowledge. from Gehm et al.: Knowledge in Motion, p. 40

1.1.3.1 Cultures of Knowledge and Their Epistemes In order to reach a concept of knowledge that makes sense for dance practices, the concept of culture of knowledge offers a starting point. It already found its justification in the 1960s with the definition by the Frankfurter Forschungskolleg. The basis for their definition of the term is an understanding of culture as practices in a determinable social space: cultural practices are always tied to underlying beliefs, which in turn ground the strategies and goals of the practices. Cultures are also always linked to power relations. Furthermore, a culture of knowledge is understood as a process of social configuration: this means that the processes of knowledge production, distribution and consumption present themselves as a complex, historically changing fabric. These historical configurations – social or cultural spaces – in turn

16

1  The Cultural Heritage of Dance and Research Practice

emerge through intellectual and material activities and exchange relations (Fried & Stolleis, 2009, pp. 181–183). Consequently, the understanding of knowledge is subject to a continuous process of change. The process of knowledge production is bound to specific social practices and institutions, to empirical approaches, to scientific paradigms, as well as to technical instruments. It is in this complexity that the epistemic culture that is found is constituted (Knorr-Cetina, 2002, p.  18/19). An epistemic culture thus refers to “those practices, mechanisms, and principles which, bound by relatedness, necessity and historical coincidence, determine in a field of knowledge how we know what we know” (ibid., p. 11). Western societies are characterised as knowledge societies because of their epistemic culture. This means that knowledge, forms of knowledge and knowledge orders are understood as a fundamental element of all areas of social life. The focus still lies on epistemic knowledge systems. The narrow definition of epistemic that applies here states that knowledge and cognition are dependent on reflection and thus on an awareness of what is known: “Typically, what ‘cognition’ means is definitely bound to reflection, i.e., to a distancing reference” (quoted from Schürmann in Bockrath et al., 2008, p. 53/54). However, such narrow definitions of knowledge are currently no longer sufficient to capture the complex spectrum of social life. With regard to the scientific-theoretical as well as methodological determination of the specificity of performative practices, it will become clear in the course of the argumentation that this is particularly the case for movement and dance. The definition of cognition cited above already reveals a first dispute about the knowledge generated by dance practice: it is calls into question whether this bodily knowledge is knowledge at all in the epistemological sense. For – following the definition by the scientific canon – cognition, in a narrow epistemic understanding, has two formal moments: the moment when the cognising party distances itself from the object of cognition, as well as the moment when the cognising party refers to the object of cognition in a relative perspective. In conclusion, this means that the concept of practical cognition, as a knowledge generated in practice, would be conceptually false and epistemologically impossible (ibid.). Thus, the narrow epistemic concept of knowledge outlined above will have to be expanded in order to develop adequate conceptualisations and methodological approaches for the forms of knowledge found in dance practice. Approaches to resolving this contradiction and moving towards a knowledge-­ generating methodology can already be found in works on practice as research and artistic research in an argumentatively and conceptually quite well-developed form. In the Yearbook Volume 26 of the Gesellschaft für Tanzforschung (Society for Dance Research) (Quinten & Schroedter, 2016) researchers discuss, argue, and illustrate this conflict within the philosophy of science from a position that is critical of science. They use examples from the artistic dance, dance education and other fields. They take an approach that is critical of science because they are confronted with an understanding of research as a genuine field of science, which as a rule demands a goal-oriented, systematic, and objective or objectifiable process of knowledge production (Abraham in ibid., p. 19). In the introduction to her study on artistic research, Haarmann expresses doubt about whether the sequence of research

1.1  Insights into Intangible Heritage and Research Methods

17

first and then cognition is actually mandatory, a doubt that reverses the accepted logic. After all, is it not the case that through thinking and in laboratory experiments or from practical experience, knowledge is first gained, and then researched and substantiated? Furthermore, she joins the ranks of those who generally question the extent to which it is necessary to schematise artistic processes for the sake of research. She further raises the question of whether the natural sciences, as well as the humanities, should generally recognise that they work just as intuitively and inaccurately. But since they nevertheless constantly generate new knowledge, it would only be consistent to first de-schematise these areas of science (Haarmann, 2019, p. 26). The challenge of researching dance obviously lies in finding concepts and theoretical models that allow us to grasp the dynamics of movements and orders of movement: “From this perspective, dance studies [referring to the German-speaking context of dance studies] is a critique of science insofar as it opposes a knowledge that attempts to grasp moving processes through static concepts” (Klein in Haller, 2014, p.  12). It is therefore necessary to expand the epistemes of the prevailing knowledge culture or scientific research in order to formulate an adequate concept for dance knowledge on a theoretical level and to be able to determine it on a methodological level. A concept of research that can be described as a creative activity might be useful. This would make it possible to generate knowledge that has not existed in this form until now. However, within the framework of this epistemic expansion of the concept of research, it would have to be ensured that creative research processes located in practice can be followed and retraced in terms of methodology. Bringing both aspects together, Abraham proposes “to recognise as researching activities all those human activities that work in an insistent (read: systematic) way on a process of discovering and gaining new insights” (Abraham in Quinten & Schroedter, 2016, p. 20). This would open the way for scientific work with and through dance or rather through artistic dance work. 1.1.3.2 Performativity, Empraxis and Dance Knowledge The scientific work with and in dance practices is preceded by fundamental questions about performative knowledge or knowledge in movement: the question in which way dance can be perceived, grasped, and defined at all, as well as whether it is a matter of experiential knowledge, embodied knowledge, or aesthetic knowledge (cf. in Gehm et al., 2007; Klein, 2004). Furthermore, it becomes necessary to reflect on whether the classification into existing knowledge categories is possible and necessary. Furthermore, it is of interest what repercussions this methodical approach has on both dance and research practices. Based on these questions, researchers of dance practices are initially confronted with performative situations. These primarily contain knowledge through or in movement that is situated in the body, and in space and time. They are also associated with processes of change. Furthermore, they refer to the so-called ephemeral qualities of dance moments. In contrast to this, performative knowledge in the true sense means that acting – performing – is not

18

1  The Cultural Heritage of Dance and Research Practice

only dependent on a body or medium, but is also based on linguisticity. This finds its justification in the fact that in the analysis and description of performative situations, labels such as meaning, concept and structure can be assigned. These rationallinguistically connotated features are also reflected in their realisation as an action in space and time (For more details, see Fischer-Lichte, 2016). Closely connected to this is then the question of gaining knowledge and generating knowledge from performative situations. This primarily concerns the verbalisation or transmission demanded for scientific usability. However, this fails due to the so far assumed impossibility of verbalising non-cognitive knowledge (Gehm et  al., 2007; Klein, 2004). On the other hand, the scientific discussion of dance practices ultimately demands that it be conceptually defined. Given this ambiguity, it can be concluded that it can be primarily practical approaches that provide access to knowledge in the actual moment of its application. This is what an empractical experience can do. The term empraxis is used in this context as a new linguistic coinage with the basic meaning of bodily-involved action in the sense of a knowledge through action. It was introduced into German philosophy of language by the language theorist and psychologist Karl Bühler.17 Empraxis is thus everyday experience and action. It means a functioning execution of action, for example in sports, dance and art, which is performed without prior thinking about the execution of the action. Empractical action is understood as pre-­ rational, pre-theoretical action and presupposes intuition and implicit knowledge (Caysa, 2015, p. 160/161). Stekeler-Weithofer uses the term in his philosophy of self-consciousness. According to his argumentation, humans have an implicit knowledge, which shows itself as knowledge-having in doing-capability: empractically, one knows what one knows as long as one is not asked about it (cf. on this in Stekeler-Weithofer, 2005). Volker Caysa finally developed the concept of empraxis further in the context of the philosophy of sport for the anthropology of the body (cf. Caysa, 2015). Dance and theatre studies are already grounded in the paradigm of the empractical. Building on this, the concept is discussed for artistic practice in a transdisciplinary way. In the current discourse of dance studies in the German-speaking context, the methods based on empractical experience that have developed out of this context focus on the understanding or acquiring as the body’s own exercise of the forms of dance. This allows to distinguish between different forms of movement in one’s own experience. The labels bodywork, quality of movement, materialities, space of movement and sensory-aesthetic experiences are named as differentiating categories and constitutive of empractical experience. They in turn refer to implicit knowledge stocks and thus to processes of incorporation and modes of perception

 In his Sprachtheorie  – Die Darstellungsform der Sprache (1934), Karl Bühler speaks of the “incorporation of speech into other meaningful behaviour as deserving of its own name”. He calls this speaking ‘empraktisches Reden’. Bühler refers to indicator words that control the actions of the receiver in a very simple yet highly complex way. For example, when someone calls for help, this one word is enough to trigger highly complex series of actions. Cf. in detail in Karl Bühler: Sprachtheorie. The representational form of language. Unchanged new edition. Lucius and Lucius, Stuttgart 1992. 17

1.1  Insights into Intangible Heritage and Research Methods

19

within performative practice. This includes popular and artistic forms as well as training and movement practices. Thus, performative practice proves to be a form of safeguarding and transmission, in the sense that specific knowledge is not only generated, but is also linked to already existing knowledge at the same time and in subsequent dance situations (Kämpfe in Bischof & Lampert, 2020, pp. 56–61). 1.1.3.3 Practice as Research The approaches to empractical methods that have been developed and partially implemented are generally classified under the keyword practice as research or research in practice. They refer to ways of accessing knowledge in performative practice. They are only accessible in this practice itself through bodily experience, since they refer primarily to implicit or incorporated knowledge. Based on this kind of empractical experience, systematic procedures and meaningful categories were sought to capture these forms of knowledge in a scientific framework. For this purpose, it was first discussed whether a linguization in the sense of a translatability of empirical experience into theorems adequate for science could be achieved. The aim was to find ways of combining this way of knowing with established methods. Ultimately, the search for secure methodological modes is about a recognition of practice as research as an equivalent form of research (Quinten & Schroedter, 2016, p.  37). Practice as research thus touches on questions that have occupied dance research in particular in recent years. Questions regarding the generation of knowledge linked to dance practices and the functioning of communication through movement practices (Quinten & Schroedter, 2016, p. 37; cf. also previous work in Brandstetter & Wulf, 2007; Gehm et al., 2007; Huschka, 2009, 2014). Furthermore, it is of increasing interest to what extent dance practices are performative in that they simultaneously constitute reality (see Chap. 4 on performative methods for more detail). In research projects that have already been carried out, dance has proven to be particularly suitable for exploring forms of knowledge that are bound (as in tied) to the body or to movement and are thus located outside the realm of language (cf. Sect. 4.3 on the safeguarding and transmission of dance knowledge). It is important to bear in mind that categories that include non-linguistic dimensions are necessary. This is the only way to also take the visible, the audible, the perceptible, as well as visual forms and signs into account. It allows us to develop a hermeneutics that is open to the tacit dimension of danced space (Quinten & Schroedter, 2016, p. 37). Since the 2000s, there have been more and more attempts to systematically relate science and artistic practices to one another. Artistic and performative practices from the field of artistic research are used as research methods. In artistic research, knowledge is gained in a way that cannot be experienced outside of this situation. It aims at knowledge that can be experienced sensorially and physically (Mey, 2018, p.  2). According to Mey, the different approaches and implementations basically distinguish between three types: arts-informed research, artistic research, and arts-­ based research. While the first form uses artistic forms of expression to present

20

1  The Cultural Heritage of Dance and Research Practice

research findings, artistic research uses various artistic practices to explore the phenomena themselves. The third form represents an intermediate form (ibid.). Last but not least, behind these breakdowns of transdisciplinary artistic research processes lies the critical observation that research processes simultaneously demand systematisations and schematisations. This in turn contradicts most artistic, dance and generally creative processes. Even if these are systematically conceptualised, planned, and implemented within the framework of concept art, this systematisation emerges from the artistic intention in a way that is referential to and thus immanent in the dance piece. However, the kind of systematisations that generalise from an academic perspective, as demanded for art schools by the Bologna Process in an extensive way, limit creative processes. Hence, this sensitive differentiation will probably have to be maintained if one wishes to maintain artistic practice in its autopoietic, self-referential and relatively autonomous mode untouched by any research paradigm. It would then make sense to identify a subfield, fluctuating in its limitations and transitions, in which artistic processes find a reflexive reconnection (Haarmann, 2019, pp. 14–17). In addition to the Bologna Process18 there are other impulses that have led to the integration of artistic methods, especially in qualitative research. For example, the “monoculture of verbal representation [causes] a limitation of the traditional presentations of results” because, for one, not all senses are addressed and, for another, there is a restriction to existing terms within our knowledge system (Mey, 2018, p. 3). The two forms of arts-based research and arts-informed research, on the other hand, are, according to Barone and Eisner, “heuristic through which we deepen and make more complex our understanding of some aspect of the world” (Barone & Eisner, 2012, p. 3). They make it possible for findings to be made accessible and understandable to the public, which, in contrast, is mostly prevented by the development of a separate language within the scientific system. Another feature is that the research process itself is a participatory act. Furthermore, the research results become an interpretative act through the reception associated with their presentation. This contradicts the established scientific paradigm of the objectivity of results (Mey, 2018, p. 3). Whereby, in this context, it needs to be discussed in principle to what extent the apparent objectivity of verbal forms of presentation can equally be attributed to acts of interpretation. The acceptance of artistic research is thus dependent on the understanding of scientific knowledge and thus on the question of what kind of knowledge falls under this very knowledge (cf. Klein, 2011, p. 3). Unlike in the established sciences, the aim is thus not to generate universally valid knowledge in the sense of “general, retrievable and intersubjectively verifiable knowledge”, but to create “spaces for thinking” (Bippus, 2010, p.  22/23). Proponents of artistic methods believe that knowledge is implicit to artistic processes and therefore no  What must be seen as a positive result of the Bologna Process, according to Haarmann’s argumentation, is the inclusion of artistic practices into the epistemological and methodological discourse due to the demand for categorical consideration of all courses of study for the purpose of comparability. What remains to be negotiated is a constructive and adequate way of integrating artistic processes as research processes. Cf. in Haarmann, 2019, pp. 14/15. 18

1.1  Insights into Intangible Heritage and Research Methods

21

linguistic representation is necessary. They are not a substitute for established scientific ways of knowing, but an extension in the “field of the knowable” (ibid.). It is this wider concept of cognition that Haarmann takes as a starting point. She proposes that instead of the knowledge content that is demanded by established research, which in the field of art applies to works of art, the otherness of the knowledge processes of artistic methods should be taken into account. She goes on to analyse these processes of cognition: insofar as research as an active practice generates cognition as a result (which she equally questions; see Sect. 1.1.3 Performative methods for more detail), the concept of insight is the equivalent to this in the field of artistic practices (Haarmann, 2019, pp. 28–30).19 Haarmann defines this term in relation to the perception of the involved processes, materialities, values and implications of artistic-formative processes – so to speak, the self-experiencing insight-­ taking and insight-having into the becoming of art. She describes dance practices as a visual art form in its own rights, in which dance pieces are created through the movement of one’s own body. Accordingly, instead of insight, she uses the concept of impression in the sense of an empractical bodily-sensory experience. Underlying these conceptualisations is the view, which is becoming established in the discourse of philosophy of science, that recognition is an activity of understanding. It encompasses various forms of grasping, emphasising, and articulating.20 It is this practical character of cognitive processes that constitutes the explorative nature of research and its basic procedures: intuiting, trying, rejecting, searching, forming, and representing. These procedures are not genuinely performative-artistic practices, but are equally found in research processes of thinking and writing: reading, arguments, controversies, discussions, doubting, correcting, adjusting, publications, conferences. Furthermore, performative-artistic work is located in laboratory-like spaces: the studio or the dance hall as a hub for performative practices of artistic or dance activity, the associated practices of learning, conceptualising, elaborating and realising, the involved and referential discourses, infrastructures and surrounding socio-­ cultural, political and economic conditions (ibid.). Accordingly, the research field of practice, like the scientific laboratory, is a network of references. Ultimately, they are the same ways of recording, highlighting, and articulating in modified forms. The argumentation presented here thus counters the danger of maintaining the contrast between dance and science – or, in the context of artistic research, between artistic practice and science. This was subliminally present in the bold claims of research in practice in the initial introductions to the discourse. Yet, it ultimately perpetuates the special status of dance practices because of their ostensible scientific incomprehensibility (Kleinschmidt in Quinten  In a next step, Haarmann determines the methods of visual practice in art as research procedures and at the same time artistic articulations of insight. Her aim is to define an epistemic aesthetics. In doing so, she draws on preliminary works on philosophical-aesthetic by Baumgarten, Fiedler, and Benjamin. Cf. Haarmann, 2019, pp. 33–39. 20  Interesting in this context is the reference to Kleist’s statement on speech as the ‘workshop of reason’. He declares the activity of speech itself as the ‘workplace of thought’, determining it as the venue and enabling condition of the formation of thought. Cf. Haarmann, 2019, p. 44/45. 19

22

1  The Cultural Heritage of Dance and Research Practice

& Schroedter, 2016, p.  99/100). The categorical juxtaposition of performative-­ artistic and established scientific practices does not solve the dilemma. However, it is important to show that the boundaries are fluid. In both fields, work is self-­ referential and performative. At the same time, both dance work and scientific work mean a gain for both fields. A discussion of performativity, intentionality and transdisciplinarity in the artistic as well as the scientific field should not avoid this reflection on perpetuated stigmas. Taking this as a starting point, Yvonne Hardt proposes using especially the practice of teaching dance as an area for research in practice. She argues that teaching situations and teaching sites already have their own conceptual structure and reflexivity (cf. Hardt in Quinten & Schroedter, 2016, p. 155/156 as well as the concept Tanztechniken 2010 using concrete examples in Diehl & Lampert, 2011 and 100xTanz in Odenthal, 2019; also, the case studies on the safeguarding and further development of dance heritage in the following section and in the fifth chapter of this study the example of a university seminar).

1.2 Intangible Cultural Heritage and Dance Practice in the German Context For the German research practice, the topic of intangible cultural heritage, especially in connection with dance practices, has become of interest over the course of the last decade. Mainly in order to provide the basis for argumentation with regard to the implementation of the objectives of the Convention for the Safeguarding of the Intangible Cultural Heritage. This is because, despite the ratification of the Convention by the German government 10  years after its adoption in December 2012 (legally effective since July 2013), political leaders – the federal government, federal states, assigned ministries, the German Commission for UNESCO (DUK) – and experts were for a long time in the process of forming opinions on the relevance, significance and implementability of the Convention.21 The ratification paved the way for researching arguing and implementing the Convention’s objectives from a German perspective on the intangible cultural heritage, in particular on the dance heritage. (Examples of this can be found in the following Sect. 1.2.2 on the developments in the present) First and foremost, the resulting interest of cultural policy in  The feasibility study published in 2011 under the leadership of Marie-Theres Albert at the UNESCO Chair in Heritage Studies provides a clear and well-argued summary of these considerations, controversies, and initial options. In principle, the deliberately open and broad definition of intangible heritage in the Convention proves to be problematic in its appropriate interpretation according to local conditions. In addition, there are primarily concerns about the commercial and otherwise interest-driven exploitation of the nomination by professional associations and interest groups, as well as the accompanying devaluation of the concern for cultural heritage through the designation of trivialising objects. Another focus of the discussion is the consideration of traditions and cultures of migrants that have been practiced in the diaspora for generations, but also the stigma of the German culture of remembrance as well as associated traditions and terminology that are considered taboo. ibid., pp. 30–33. 21

1.2  Intangible Cultural Heritage and Dance Practice in the German Context

23

the subject promoted and demanded scientific research. In addition, a strong effort on the part of those responsible has since been observed to increase awareness of their own intangible cultural heritage and its value for social development among the population and in politics. Furthermore, projects located in practice receive infrastructural and, as far as possible, financial support within the framework of the before named institutional initiatives for dance. Thus, one can currently speak of an increasingly active, participatory, and dynamic development for the intangible cultural heritage. This applies both to the institutional leaders and actors from politics and science, as well as to the practitioners of intangible cultural heritage. The nationwide inventory of intangible cultural heritage is an obligatory part of the implementation of the Convention. It shows in an exemplary manner which living cultural traditions and forms of expression are practised and passed on in Germany. It pays tribute to these living cultural forms of expressions and their rich repository of experiential knowledge. The inventory is intended to make the diversity of intangible cultural forms of expression in and from Germany visible and to thus create awareness of them. However, it is not only intended as a tool for inventorying, but also to initiate a broader debate on intangible cultural heritage. In this context, questions concerning the social function and the contribution of intangible cultural heritage to the sustainable development of society are up for discussion. The attention generated should lead to the safeguarding, continuation and dynamic development of traditions practised by groups and communities in Germany today (DUK, 2007b). The nationwide inventory is compiled in a multi-stage process by the German Commission for UNESCO and various German state actors. The proposals for the register come directly from civil society  – the so-called bearer or practising communities.22 In order to be included in the national inventory, the cultural expression must meet the criteria laid down in the UNESCO Convention of 2003. These include, among other things, its active and on-going practice as well as the creative transmission and further development of the cultural expression by the bearer communities. The independent Committee of Experts on Intangible Cultural Heritage at the German UNESCO Commission also places particular emphasis on:  The compilation of the nationwide inventory involves a multi-stage process involving the federal states and the Conference of Ministers of Culture, the Federal Government Commissioner for Culture and the Media, the Federal Foreign Office, and the German Commission for UNESCO. Civil society actors – the practising bearer community or communities – can make proposals for inclusion in the list. A uniform application procedure applies throughout Germany. Each federal state makes a preliminary selection and can forward up to four applications to the Secretariat of the Standing Conference of the Ministers of Education and Cultural Affairs of the Länder in the Federal Republic of Germany. The nationwide list of nominations is forwarded to the independent Expert Committee on Intangible Cultural Heritage at the German UNESCO Commission. The Committee examines and evaluates the application dossiers according to the criteria for intangible cultural heritage and recommends cultural expressions or good safeguarding practices for inclusion in the inventory. The Conference of Ministers of Culture and the Federal Government Commissioner for Culture and the Media finally confirm the selection recommendations of the Committee of Experts (https://www.unesco.de/kultur-und-natur/immaterielles-kulturerbe/ immaterielles-kulturerbe-werden). 22

24

1  The Cultural Heritage of Dance and Research Practice

• an open, inclusive, and participatory safeguarding of traditions; • a nuanced historical reflection of the customary practices; • the demonstration of the significance to society and the active commitment to civil society; • an explanation of the living tradition’s ability to change; • an explanation of how knowledge and skills are passed on measures for safeguarding and further development); • an extensive and demonstrable involvement of the relevant communities in the application process; • the presentation of links and relations to similar forms of cultural expression in Germany, Europe and beyond (if applicable). Furthermore, the catalogue of criteria derived from Art.2 para.1–2 and Art.15 of the UNESCO Convention for the Safeguarding of the Intangible Cultural Heritage applies (https://www.unesco.de/kultur-­und-­natur/immaterielles-­kulturerbe/ immaterielles-­kulturerbe-­werden/aufnahmekriterien-­fuer-­0). In accordance with this framework, cultural forms of expression such as dance, theatre, music, customs, festivals, and crafts which are of particular importance in Germany at local, regional, or national level as well as across borders are included in the inventory. The cultural forms of expression must be practised in Germany, but their origins may also lie outside Germany. The inventory is thus in no way intended to be a record of a German heritage. Rather, it shows living cultural traditions and forms of expression that are practiced in Germany. Furthermore, the National Register of Good Safeguarding Practices for intangible cultural heritage has been established. The register makes successful programmes and projects visible that meet the principles and objectives of the Convention for the Safeguarding of the Intangible Cultural Heritage in a special way. It is part of the nationwide register. The model programmes and projects included in the Register serve as examples of effective measures for the safeguarding of intangible cultural heritage and are intended to inspire imitation (https:// www.unesco.de/kultur-­u nd-­n atur/immaterielles-­k ulturerbe/immaterielles-­ kulturerbe-­deutschland/gute-­praxis). The criteria for inclusion in the Register of Good Safeguarding Practices also include measures to ensure the continued existence of the intangible cultural heritage which are judged to be particularly effective. These safeguarding measures include identification, documentation, research, preservation, protection, promotion, enhancement, transmission (in particular, through formal and informal education), and revitalisation of the various aspects of this heritage. Thus, the model programme in question is particularly in line with the principles and objectives of the Convention (https://www.unesco.de/kultur-­und-­ natur/immaterielles-­k ulturerbe/immaterielles-­k ulturerbe-­w erden/aufnahmek riterien-­fuer). In December 2018, the register contained 88 entries of intangible cultural forms of expressions; as of December 2020, there were already 106 entries (including 95 cultural expressions and 11 model projects in the Register of Good Safeguarding

1.2  Intangible Cultural Heritage and Dance Practice in the German Context

25

Practices).23 The process set in motion has already made good progress. In addition, the nomination of cultural practices to the nationwide register has triggered a broader public debate as well as increased academic discussion on the issue of intangible cultural heritage, and in particular the significance of cultural practices. In this context, forms of dance practice are receiving more and more attention. This is an enrichment, because contemporary artistic dance, for example, has proven to be a social, political, and aesthetic medium of reflection par excellence: in addition to the questions of what dance is and how it can be distinguished from movement and action, it also freely raises questions about the ephemeral as well as the tangible or intangible aspects of the social, socio-cultural, and political realms. In doing so, dance practice can succeed in demonstrating the constitutive value of performative practices for these social spheres.

1.2.1 Inscription Process for Modern Expressive Dance It is the dance heritage, which usually leaves no traces in the dance archives, but remains all the more present in the bodies. Britta Wirthmüller in Odenthal: The Century of Dance, p. 264

After the creation of the nationwide inventory, this possibility was used very quickly for Modern Expressive Dance. The concern for and objectives of safeguarding the intangible cultural heritage coincided with the considerations and initial initiatives of the sponsoring organisations of the so-called heritage of modern dance. They jointly worked on the application for inclusion in the list of intangible cultural heritage. Within this framework, the origins of the various stylistic forms as well as their self-image, their pedagogical and artistic practices, and problems, and above all the further development of their efforts and concepts for transmission and training were reflected upon together. The group of supporters of the application included the following institutions: Arbeitsgemeinschaft Rosalia Chladek Deutschland e.V. with the support of the Internationale Gesellschaft Rosalia Chladek Wien e.V., Elementarer Tanz e.V.  Cologne, European Association for Laban/Bartenieff Movement Studies e.V., Institute for Contemporary Dance of the Folkwang University of the Arts Essen, Gesellschaft für Tanzforschung e.V. (the latter in a leading and coordinating role). Modern dance was included in the nationwide register of intangible cultural heritage in 2014 with the designation ‘Styles and ways of imparting rhythm and free dance movement’ (Fleischle-Braun et  al., 2017, pp. 31–49).  Cf. www.unesco.de/kultur-und-natur/immaterielles-kulturerbe/immaterielles-kulturerbe-­ deutschland / bundesweites-34. Germany currently has four entries on the UNESCO Representative List of the Intangible Cultural Heritage of Humanity (as of January 2021): The Idea and Practice of Cooperatives, Organ Construction and Organ Music, Falconry (together with 17 other states), Indigo Blue Dyeing (together with four other states). 23

26

1  The Cultural Heritage of Dance and Research Practice

The definition developed in the process of the application includes the dance styles and training traditions of the rhythm and expressive dance movement that emerged in German-speaking countries at the beginning of the twentieth century. This was primarily inspired and supported by the Lebensreform movement (life-­ reform movement) and the discourses of avant-garde art of the time. Dance protagonists were also looking for new forms of expression of the body, especially in distinction to the conventional classic styles of concert dance of the time. During the Weimar Republic, the work of individuals such as Rosalia Chladek, Rudolf von Laban, Mary Wigman, Gret Palucca, Maja Lex and Kurt Jooss gave rise to various aesthetic styles and transmission practices of modern, free, and expressive dance. Based on the studies of movement by the founding personalities of the rhythm and expressive dance movement, the various practices of free dance had developed. They were developed into teaching systems at their places of practice, and in some cases complemented with theoretical studies. The dancers developed certain training practices and basic dance premises by practicing them. They created didactics for teaching the formative characteristics and techniques that determined their aesthetics. Comparative examination revealed the following common pedagogical and didactic cornerstones of dance styles and training traditions (Fleischle-Braun et al., 2017, pp. 31–49): • Educational theory rooted in the art education movement and reform pedagogy; this implies a holistic ideal of wholeness in the sense of Delsarte’s Trinity Law: the unity of body, mind, and soul by means of the promotion of physical-motor and artistic expressive abilities. • Exploratory learning as a working principle; it includes exploratory and analytical ways of working with the aim of developing and becoming aware of physical possibilities of movement and expression. • Research into economic and efficient ways of movement based on physical principles; this includes, above all, reference to the teachings, practices, and anatomical-­physiological and biomechanical body knowledge of gymnastics and natural gymnastics. • Systematisation of the expressive and formal elements of dance movement; for this purpose, recourse was made to related systematics such as music, rhythm, and theatre, but also scientific findings from anatomy, physiology, and geometry were considered. • Establishment of schools and master-classes; typically, concepts were determined and passed on by the charisma and authority of the respective personalities of the artists, accompanied by a strong identification of the students with the artistic role model, dance-aesthetic ideals, and artistic working methods, resulting in the formation of dense groups with a common habitus. • Social empathy through collaborative work processes; this refers to the creative-­ choreographic work processes used, and group improvisations with interactive-­ communicative tasks as forms of work that increase interpersonal awareness. The institutional ties of dance education in combination with the political context that forced teachers and dancers into exile creates a complex picture. The respective

1.2  Intangible Cultural Heritage and Dance Practice in the German Context

27

organisation of the key personalities of the expressive dance movement, their teaching institutions and modes of transmission are reflected in three basic lines (cf. Fleischle-Braun et al., 2017, pp. 31–49): Elementary dance was developed by Maja Lex (1906–1986). She began at the Günther School in Munich (1925–1944). Her work is continued by the German Sport University Cologne with the main subject Elementary Dance, supported by the Elementarer Tanz e.V. founded in 1991. The Chladek System is based on Rosalia Chladek’s work (1905–1995). Starting from the Neue Schule Hellerau (1920–1924), she continued her work in exile at the specially founded Schule Hellerau-Laxenburg near Vienna (1925–1928). Her teaching system is continued by the Music and Arts University of the City of Vienna in the subject of contemporary dance pedagogy, supported by the Internationale Gesellschaft Rosalia Chladek e.V., founded in 1972. Rudolf von Laban (1879–1958) founded the Laban System. His system quickly spread to schools and institutes founded by him or his students, for example in Munich, Ascona, Zurich, Stuttgart, Hamburg, Würzburg, Berlin, Manchester and Addleston. His work is continued in one line with the Joos-Leder-Method at the Folkwang Schule Essen at the Institute for Contemporary Dance, as well as in another line with the Laban/Bartenieff Movement Studies at the Institute of Movement Studies New York, supported by the European association EUROLAB e.V., through which the Laban Movement Studies are taught in an even more comprehensive way. Another school that is connected to the Laban legacy and teaches his fundamentals in training is the Lola-Rogge-School in Hamburg. Today, from these three basic lines, widely ramified and diverse developments and subdivisions can be found (ibid., and references there). It should not go unmentioned that other teaching could not be preserved due to the political conditions during the Nazi regime and after the World War, as well as due to the changed trends in art-aesthetics. The Mary Wigman Society, for example, has dissolved and its artistic legacy is cared for or rather administrated by the Tanzarchiv Köln and the Isadora Duncan Society.

1.2.2 Transmission and Further Development of Dance Heritage in the Present Tradition is not keeping the ashes, but passing on the flame Thomas Morus, quoted from Fleischle-Braun et al. (2017), p. 51

There is still a need to justify within the public and academic discourse as to why we should currently be concerned with the expressions and movement systems of modern dance, with their concepts of dance didactics, and with the body and movement knowledge imparted in the process. If one enters spaces of dance practices, the basic argument quickly becomes obvious: the various dance styles and traditions for transmission of the rhythmic and expressive dance movement all have a prominent

28

1  The Cultural Heritage of Dance and Research Practice

place in the practice of dance education today, especially in basic dance training as well as in the context of artistic dance productions. The Laban/Bartenieff movement studies are furthermore used in the context of movement and dance therapy (Brandstetter & Klein, 2015, p. 65ff as well as individual contributions in Fleischle-­ Braun et al., 2017). At the same time, this means that the various forms, techniques, and working methods are already being taught, passed on, and practiced in the third generation of dancers with their own perspectives, contextual knowledge, experiences, and individual readings. First of all, this shows the value of the artistic-­ pedagogical approaches of modernism in the dance and transmission practice of today. Most concepts in dance didactics draw on ideas from these artistic-­pedagogical approaches to transmission. They are passed on through generations of dancers by way of person- and body-bound transmission and practice. This leads to further developments and transformations, hybrids, and variations in the new context of dance, society, and personal contexts. The present generation learns differently and also the physical conditions are different. Furthermore, there are new preferences in the aesthetics of movement. Therefore, corresponding didactic methods have and will change. At the same time, it means that the original dance heritage in its principles, characteristic peculiarities, working methods, and training methods will not be preserved in this form. This would only be possible if care was taken to preserve the forms that are marked as original in the same way (Fleischle-Braun et al., 2017, pp. 48–50). This is precisely what is being aimed for in the context of the inclusion of modern dance in the Nationwide Inventory of Intangible Cultural Heritage. The fundamental concepts and ways of working are identified through joint research in archives and in practice. There are written records in the form of texts and documents, they are also personally remembered by former dancers, they are rediscovered and reconstructed in joint research work by dancers, and they are re-­interpreted as creative inputs in artistic dance projects. This does not only happen in the artistic field, but it applies equally to the field of teaching. This kind of conceptual work on the ‘living heritage of dance’ was initiated at the Cologne conference ‘The Heritage of Modern Dance in a Contemporary Context. Dance laboratories for research in practice’. It was organised by the institutions of modern dance active in the German-speaking countries and held in June 2015 at the German Sport University Cologne. It can be considered trend-setting due to its compact, unifying, and at the same time very broad spectrum of thematic reviews, the work with contemporary witnesses, the methodological diversity and research in practice. The resulting conference proceedings are available as a comprehensive workbook for researching and putting the intangible cultural heritage of modern dance into practice.24 The conference was preceded by the objective to  Fleischle-Braun et  al. (eds.): Zum immateriellen Kulturerbe des Modernen Tanzes Fleischle-­ Braun et al., 2017. In addition to an introduction to the objectives and concept of the conference, the volume contains papers on processes of transmission and appropriation, on concrete concepts of Modern Expressive Dance, on contemporary training concepts and on dance pedagogical reflections. A compact summary report on the conference can be found in Quinten & Schroedter, 2016, pp. 49–59. 24

1.2  Intangible Cultural Heritage and Dance Practice in the German Context

29

establish a joint cooperative work on these topics. Another goal was to make the implicit knowledge inherent in the practices of modern dance tangible for the conference participants in an empractical sense. In this context, it should be mentioned that this kind of cooperative practice-led research is already a typical form of work in modern dance itself. For example, the summer school on Monte Verità under the auspices of Rudolf von Laban was designed as a cooperative study of movement and artistic research. The way of working at Rosalia Chladek’s school in Hellerau (Dresden), as well as in the New School Hellerau-Laxenburg (Laxenburg near Vienna) is remembered in a similar way. In the sometimes night-long joint experimentations with sequences of movement, she was primarily concerned with collective experimentation, observational sensing, and collective reflection on the internal processes of the school (Fleischle-Braun in Quinten & Schroedter, 2016, pp. 51–56). Accordingly, the approach of a transdisciplinary cooperative practice research was chosen for the Cologne conference. A wide range of working formats was used for this purpose: performances, lecture performances, dance laboratories and workshop discussion. In terms of methods, the range extended from practical experiential knowledge, to aesthetic-perceptual ways of knowing, to forms of information about the context as background knowledge. Among the participants were experts from a wide range of formal and dance-practical levels: dancers, dance artists, dance teachers, dance educators, students, dance scholars, cultural scholars, cultural anthropologists, educational researchers. This cooperative research strategy has laid a conceptual foundation. The aim is not only to work on the content, but also to bring together the methodological approaches of research in practice, oral history, and the historiographic-hermeneutic analysis of archived source material and to integrate them into the academic discourse. The precursors of such transdisciplinary and cross-institutional collaborations are the large-scale Germany-wide initiative TANZPLAN DEUTSCHLAND (2006–2011), which was funded by the Federal Cultural Foundation, and subsequently the two funding programmes TANZFONDS PARTNER (2011–2014) and TANZFONDS ERBE (2011–2019), which were also initiated and funded by the German Federal Cultural Foundation. TANZPLAN DEUTSCHLAND sees itself as an initiating strategy for dance with the aim of comprehensively and systematically strengthening the art form of dance. In addition to a network of on-site dance centres in Berlin, Hamburg, and Essen, the first networking platforms and archives on dance media have been established online, and research projects of the type research in practice have been implemented. While TANZFONDS PARTNER provided funding for partnerships between dance institutions and schools, TANZFONDS ERBE offered a framework for artistic projects on the cultural heritage of dance. The artistic results of these processes gave the public access to a living history of dance that had previously been the preserve of only a few experts. TANZFONDS ERBE was oriented towards the goals of the UNESCO Convention for the

30

1  The Cultural Heritage of Dance and Research Practice

Safeguarding of the Intangible Cultural Heritage and was thus able to provide impulses for innovative approaches to the transmission of dance heritage.25 This was followed by further developments in the field of artistic research with a focus on a living heritage of dance. These include for example, the workshop-­ festival ‘Transnational Concepts of the Modern Dance’, which was held in 2018 in Berlin in cooperation with the TANZFONDS ERBE project, organised by the GfT (Society for Dance Research). There, in continuation of the Cologne event, further approaches were discussed in dance laboratories, in particular the artistic-­ pedagogical approaches of Karin Waehner, Sigurd Leeder, Rosalia Chladek and Marianne Vogelsang. Furthermore, the project 100xTANZ implemented by the Akademie der Künste in Berlin in 2019 should be mentioned. It included an exhibition, a festival, an international campus, and a publication. Within this framework, the heritage of expressive dance as a contemporary art was processed, performed, and documented through dance in an artistic way (Available at Academy of the Arts (2019): What the body remembers. On the topicality of dance. Online: https://www. adk.de/de/projekte/2019/tanzerbe/). But also within academia, there is an increasing number of symposia and conferences that operate entirely in the spirit of research in practice. For example, the Hamburg and Zurich conferences of the Gesellschaft für Tanzforschung (GfT) (Available on the website of the Gesellschaft für Tanzforschung: https://www.gtf-­tanzforschung.de/home). Other practical implementations and continuations or (re)discoveries of dance traditions can also be found in the traditional sites of Modern Expressive Dance, such as the Villa Wigman (former place of the Wigman School) in Bautzener Straße in Dresden (where, among other things, the TANZFONDS ERBE project PAST PRESENT FUTURE was realised in 2017) and the Folkwang School in Essen/Institute for Contemporary Dance. In addition, there are institutionally run venues and projects that also record, reconstruct, practice, and communicate the heritage of dance, as well as support projects by providing infrastructure and supporting with coordination. These  The aim was to make the history of central European modern dance visible to the public as the dance heritage of all modern dance traditions of the twentieth century and to create awareness for its importance for further developments (for example the modern dance and the postmodern dance in the USA). The funding made available was intended to make it possible to realise the elaborate processing of historical material, to clarify copyrights and rights of use, and to be able to use original music. It was agreed in the conception that no canon of important historical works should be defined, but that the applicants themselves should decide and argue why the historical choreographers, works and themes they selected are relevant for the present. This open approach enabled a wide variety of approaches to dance history. A total of 60 projects were selected that exemplify an artistic approach to dance heritage. The resulting productions became elements of the repertoire of the participating theatres and companies. The funded productions were documented in their entirety until 2014, and thereafter just a selection. The documentations provide an insight into the creation, research, and production processes. In 2016, Tanzfonds Erbe was one of 28 winners from 16 countries to receive the EU Prize for Cultural Heritage/Europa Nostra Awards in the category Education, Training and Awareness Raising for its achievements in safeguarding and transmitting the cultural heritage of dance. Can be viewed at https://tanzfonds.de/ueber-uns, or further https:// tanzfonds.de as well as the previous initiative Tanzplan Deutschland http://www.tanzplan-­ deutschland.de (last access: 27.01.2021). 25

1.3  Case Study on the Intangible Cultural Heritage of Tango

31

include, first and foremost, the dance archives in Cologne and Leipzig, as well as the previously named centres and projects established by TANZPLAN DEUTSCHLAND and continued by TANZFONDS ERBE. These examples show that traditional forms of archiving and performative practices of research and transmission are becoming increasingly intertwined (cf. the argumentation in Sect. 3.3 on the value of dance heritage in the present).

1.3 Case Study on the Intangible Cultural Heritage of Tango The aim of this paper is to develop an argumentation in respect to the nomination as intangible cultural heritage and the measures to be implemented for the safeguarding of forms of expression in the field of dance. For this purpose, the dance heritage of German Expressive Dance is used as an example. This is especially because it is currently in the nomination process. Before elaborating on the corresponding arguments from the current research discourse, reference will first be made to a previous case study. Drawing on the findings of this case study, initial argumentative approaches and critical positions can be formulated. The case study looked at the Argentinian and Uruguayan tango. It was recognised as an intangible cultural heritage in 2009. In this context, it was described, among other things, as an original popular dance expression. This moment was the starting point to analyse the nomination process.26 With the inscription of tango on the Representative List of Intangible Cultural Heritage, it was formally defined as a cultural practice that originated in the cities of Buenos Aires and Montevideo and creates a sense of identity. It combines the elements of dance, music, and poetics, based on a distinct sensibility and self-image. During the process of nomination as intangible cultural heritage, tango was increasingly understood as a traditional and original form of a culture of remembrance. For this purpose, various socio-cultural functions were assigned to it as a form of life, narration, and popular culture. It is not clearly formulated in the texts and statements related to the nomination which of the different expressions of tango that developed differently in various places are included in this definition. For in the meantime, tango is danced and lived in various traditions, styles, and forms both in the designated region of origin, Rio de la Plata, and also worldwide in the metropolises of tango that have emerged27 (Kämpfe, 2018, pp. 10–12).

 The corresponding study was published as Kämpfe: Kulturerbe Tango. Tanz, Politik und Kulturindustrie, transcript 2018. References are given by section or topic. 27  This refers above all to the globally diverse tango scenes, each of which has developed its own specificity, as well as to the various formal variations of tango dance ranging from popular dance to stage shows, social dance and individually created styles. In addition, there is the aspect of the undeniable continental exchange relationships between practitioners of tango in the field of music and dance in the course of ongoing migration movements, which ultimately had a lasting positive influence on the development of tango. A discussion of these aspects can be found in Stepputat, 2014. 26

32

1  The Cultural Heritage of Dance and Research Practice

1.3.1 Theory of Practice To paraphrase Proust, one could say that arms and legs are full of hidden imperatives. And likewise, they are full of stories, experience, knowledge, formalisations and conditionings, as well as options for their action in the form of practices. Pierre Bourdieu: Social Sense, p. 128

The study was based on the assumption that the process of such a nomination and resulting recognition is associated with formal requirements, categorical attributions and, as a consequence, with changes in the exercise of the practices concerned. Of particular interest were the consequences that such an institutional and formal act of legitimisation has for cultural forms of expression. After all, it is primarily a matter of practices that are carried out in an individual and private or traditional or ritual context. The study accordingly asked to what extent the institutional recognition of cultural practices as intangible cultural heritage by UNESCO entails changes in the meaning of these practices, or changes in the practices themselves. The focus of the study was on the reconstruction of the nomination process. This meant, as a first step, that the actors involved were recorded with their interests and intentions, their strategies used, discursive practices and actions. This also includes places, artefacts, objects, and documents that are related to the nomination process on the one hand, and to tango practice on the other. Then, important circulating discourses, symbols, meanings, and values were identified. In the last step, these individual components were interpreted in their relationship to each other and changes were traced. It was then possible to determine which strategies and formal regulations consolidated these changes and in what way. This made it possible to see the extent to which cultural practices are integrated into processes of formalisation and institutionalisation within state and interstate structures over the course of the nomination process. Furthermore, it became apparent to what extent the changes were perceived as restrictions and limitations or as new possibilities and perspectives by the protagonists. Pierre Bourdieu’s praxeological approach provided the theoretical framework for the case study. Based on the field and habitus theory, this approach allows to grasp the structural conditions associated with the practice of tango.28 They provide information about the sphere of society in which tango is located and its relationship to institutional or state actors. Furthermore, it can be determined which actors, artefacts, practices, discourses, and values are associated with tango. On this basis, the changes associated with the recognition as cultural heritage can then be discussed. In this way, the praxeological approach allows for an interpretation of the ascertainable structural relations in interaction with the cultural practice performed. This

 For a complex account of the field concept, see Bourdieu: Sociological Questions (1993). On the properties of fields, pp. 107–114 and in Bourdieu and Wacquant (2006): Reflexive Anthropology. Logic of Fields, pp. 124–147. For an insight into habit theory, see, among others, Bourdieu (1987): Social Meaning as well as Bourdieu (1998): Practical Reason. On the theory of action. 28

1.3  Case Study on the Intangible Cultural Heritage of Tango

33

complex structure consists of private, public, and institutional actors. These have strategies of various informal and institutional procedures at their disposal in order to enforce their respective interests and intentions on the ground. This requires further mechanisms in order to be successful. These include legitimisation strategies in order to be able to exercise power. Circulating discourses are also a part of this, as they constitute reality. Furthermore, the knowledge incorporated in the actors are an important aspect, since it is through them that actors act meaningfully and in the right way (or in a deliberately incorrect way) in practice (Kämpfe, 2018, pp. 12–30). This selection of categories already illustrates that the praxeological approach makes it possible to capture and interpret the multitude of aspects to be taken into account in relation to an argumentation of intangible cultural heritage. In order to collect the necessary data for this, the distinctive discourse analysis according to Diaz-Bone was used, which, starting from Bourdieu’s praxeology and Foucault’s orders of discourse, allows for an empiricism based exclusively on discursive elements (Diaz-Bone, 2010). The data material on which the study was based was a selection of texts. It included the UNESCO documents on the Convention for the Safeguarding of the Intangible Cultural Heritage as well as discursive elements of the cultural practice of tango. Three moments of analysis were selected for the data collection. The results of the first analysis referred to tango in the period leading up to its recognition as intangible cultural heritage. The set of texts to be analysed consisted of elements that came directly from the discursive production of tango practice. The second moment of analysis was the UNESCO Convention for the Safeguarding of the Intangible Cultural Heritage. The text corpus was based on a selection of UNESCO texts and from the actors involved in the nomination process in terms of content and form. The third moment of analysis referred to the tango immediately after its recognition as intangible cultural heritage (Kämpfe, 2018, p. 30/31 as well as pp. 93–116). In the following section, the results of this study are presented with a focus on the aspects of the processes of change and the possibilities of safeguarding that are decisive for the argumentation of this publication. These include the observable changes in tango practices as well as the changes in circulating meanings and values. Furthermore, results on the institutionalisation processes and on the archiving measures in the context of the nomination process can be cited. The resulting ambivalences in an evaluation of the analysis provide initial argumentative perspectives. As a consequence, it can be demanded that the actors and political authorities take responsibility and the concept of living heritage can be strengthened.

1.3.2 Power of Practice The tango is a subject of discussion and we discuss it, but like everything true it holds a secret. Jorge Luis Borges: Kabbalah and Tango, p. 112

34

1  The Cultural Heritage of Dance and Research Practice

1.3.2.1 Tango as Popular Culture, Narration and Political Strategy It became apparent in the analysis that with the beginning of the nomination process, changes took place in the practice of tango and in the discourse on tango. Whereas until then the world of tango had been a relatively closed cultural practice in everyday life in the Rio de la Plata region, political bodies and through the media also the general public now directed their attention to it. A crucial factor was the interest of cultural policy in initiating the application procedure in cooperation with selected protagonists from the world of tango. As a result, the institution UNESCO or the concept of intangible cultural heritage played an influential role in the perception as well as increasingly in the practice of tango. Crucial for this was the formal handling of certain areas of tango, which was necessary for the application process and the implementation of measures in the future. For this purpose, new actors entered the world of tango. These included first and foremost the Academia de Tango as the body authorised by the Ministry of Culture to speak and advocate for the tango. Furthermore, experts on intangible cultural heritage as well as representatives of tango were appointed as its global ambassadors. In connection with the inscription process, a descriptive definition of tango was necessary. For this purpose, the typical associated elements and protagonists were listed. This includes the practitioners of the dance, poets, musicians, singers, composers, and the iconic personalities of tango. This equally includes the artefacts involved as well as the typical instruments, especially the bandoneon, the Orquestras Típicas, clothing and footwear, scores, places such as cafés, tanguerías, neighbourhoods and streets, but also legends, myths, and historical documents. In this context, certain modes of expression of tango are described within a limited space. These include forms of language such as the typical lunfardo, stylistic forms of music and dance interpretation, the specific habitus tango as the typical behaviours and typologies of the protagonists that can be observed. This description of tango did not emerge from tango practice alone, but was created through the collaboration of selected protagonists and state authorities. This has changed the perception and understanding of what is considered tango and how it is to be practiced. The analysis further showed that in the course of the nomination process, changes in the discourse and practice of tango did indeed take place among some of the protagonists. This primarily concerned those who were involved in the nomination process or who were able to benefit from the cultural policy measures aimed at strengthen local and global tango activities. For instance, it became apparent that publications and documentations were consistent with the official representation of tango. In addition, it became evident that performances, concerts, shows, festivals, and local venues of tango were designed in accordance with the aim of the local and global promotion of tango. This includes safeguarding measures for the expressions of tango in the form of documents and media, as well as the official creation of tango academies, orchestras, and dance ensembles. Thus, with the status of intangible cultural heritage, personal profits were possible on a social or a professional work level. Apparently, this prospect functioned as a sufficiently strong latent interest among a large number of tango protagonists to accept or even encourage these changes.

1.3  Case Study on the Intangible Cultural Heritage of Tango

35

With the beginning of the nomination process, the perception and presentation of tango was no longer measured only by the self-image of the protagonists, but was now also subject to the formal and content-related requirements of the Convention and nomination process. It was no longer the individual tango dancer, musician, or tango poet who held the power to define what tango was, but rather tango now had to comply with the image determined by cultural policy, which it had to conform to if it wanted to continue to receive public recognition and infrastructural support. The world of tango also found itself confronted with discourses on national representation, universal forms of expression, or authentic modes of presentation. Interests and meanings were formulated that had not been present in the tango world until then. Thus, tango was characterised with attributes such as sensuality, emotivity, and passion. These are attributes that may have been part of practiced tango since time immemorial, yet did not represent any particular characterisation or appreciation. Furthermore, thematic areas such as tango tourism and its global presence found their way into the discourses of the protagonists acting in public. The Academia de Tango functioned as a mediator of these new meanings and perceptions, as well as a key actor for implementing measures. As a consequence, the nomination of the relatively closed everyday practice of tango as intangible cultural heritage led to an increasingly formal and interest-driven perception and development of its forms of expression (Kämpfe, 2018, pp. 211–242). 1.3.2.2 Changes of Meaning in Tango In particular for the danced tango, the analysis revealed new meanings and values based on these described processes of change. Due to the increased public and political attention paid to tango, an increase in public awareness for the knowledge, skills, and lines of development associated with the dance could be observed. They became part of political, media or public, and scientific discourses shortly after the moment of recognition. This was especially evident in the fact that there was a sudden increase in publications, documentations, media, and events related to the dance tango. Within these discourses, meanings and values were developed, conveyed, and negotiated that were to be considered as characteristic of tango as a dance. These include passion in the sense of emotions of passion, movement in the understanding of dance as a mode of movement, and exclusivity in the meaning of a distinction of practices. The economic sector discovered tango dancing for its economic value and hence the potential for its commercial exploitation. It became interesting for the entertainment sector, for the cultural industry and as a tool for image and marketing strategies. This lead to a conspicuous increase of activities such as performances, shows, festivals, tours, and new tango companies. Furthermore, a new production sector for tango emerged in order to provide, among other things, clothing, footwear, accessories, themed catering, illustrated books, music, films, merchandise products of all kinds, tango events, and tango trips. The image created could thus be promoted by being consumed. For the political sphere, the study also identified a strong appropriation of tango dance as a strategic instrument for

36

1  The Cultural Heritage of Dance and Research Practice

asserting interests. In the course of the nomination process, tango was integrated into a populist national discourse. As a result, tango dance was transformed into a symbol and cultural expression of the Argentinian nation, developed from a popular tradition. Through the discursive equation of tango dance with folklore, as was intended by cultural policy, tango was instrumentalised as a representative element of populist politics, both nationally and internationally. As a result, the entertainment and cultural industries increasingly profited from tango (Kämpfe, 2018, pp. 260–266). For the three levels mentioned above, it became apparent that due to its status as intangible cultural heritage, the importance of tango dancing had increased for society as a whole. At the same time, this was connected to its instrumentalisation for individual-strategic, economic, or political interests. 1.3.2.3 Institutionalisation Processes Within the Framework of the Inscription Procedure According to the results of the study, the process of recognition as intangible cultural heritage is closely tied to the institutionalisation of the forms of expression of tango. This refers to their juridical and conceptual definition in public and official discourse. At the same time, this means that the (relatively) uncontrolled forms of expression of tango, which were previously practiced in a private or social and easily accessible setting, are standardised, and codified within the categories of intangible cultural heritage. The perspective of institutionalisation processes lends itself to the fact that the question of how to deal with intangible cultural heritage is at the same time linked to formal and institutional approaches and implementation modalities. Two aspects become evident in the study in this regard. One is the relationship between the lived world of tango, state institutions such as the Ministry of Culture and UNESCO bodies, and civil society. Secondly, the nomination process is associated with formal handling procedures. These refer to the fact that meanings, values, and norms associated with the status of intangible cultural heritage are established for the practice of tango. They become visible in the form of standardisations of practice as well as a clichéd image conveyed in stereotypical portrayals. The practice of tango is consequently incorporated into formal structures by means of the nomination process and the reporting on the implementation of the safeguarding measures. In this context, it is interesting to see who defines the corresponding standardisations, values, and meanings in which way and on the basis of what interests. The result of the study showed that by means of the formal structures, in which the tango was integrated as a recognised intangible cultural heritage, an interest-­ driven exchange between the political sphere and the world of the tango could take place. Here, tango does not operate directly in the political sphere and thus does not become political in the strict sense. In the practice of tango, the newly established meanings, images, and standardisations are complied with, depending on the interests of the practitioners. They are thus constantly reproduced and communicated

1.3  Case Study on the Intangible Cultural Heritage of Tango

37

within the network of relationships of all actors involved. In this way, the practice of tango is available as a kind of mediating moment for political interests and justifies the existing dominant power relations. Cultural practice can accordingly be instrumentalised by political actors. This extreme situation was discernible in the study and already described in the previous sections. In this case, the developed images and standardisations for tango function as a kind of censorship mechanism. This mechanism ensures the standardisation of the expressions of the different tango practices and styles, as well as the behaviours of the practitioners. This functional connection corresponds to the accusation of political appropriation. Using the concrete case of tango, these mechanisms could be made visible and an image of tango as a cultural heritage tied to political-economic interests could be portrayed (Kämpfe, 2018, pp. 255–260). 1.3.2.4 Archiving the Cultural Heritage of Tango The formal procedures in the nomination process include the selection of the relevant elements, the determination of their characteristics, meanings, and properties, and the measures to be developed and implemented for the safeguarding of these elements. Practices of describing, typologising, and recording are used for this purpose. They ultimately correspond to an archiving process. In this way, conventions and standards are created in the public perception for describing, representing, and practicing tango. As a result, a general opinion is formed in the public discourse about what tango is or what may call itself tango. In addition to these effects on public discourses and the perceptions of tango, the archiving process leads to an initially exemplary collection of the selected elements. These include the aforementioned historical documents, visual material and sound recordings, scores, publications, narratives, typical objects and artefacts such as instruments, clothing, accessories and spatial interiors. Thus, these collections offer access to this specific cultural world to those interested, they provide access to original elements, and facilitate personal contacts. In the case of tango, this allowed for a large number of orchestras to be founded. It is remarkable that especially young musicians rediscovered the tango and could learn from still living tango musicians. Inspired by traditional teaching methods, tango academies were founded that simultaneously offer dance, composition, poetics, instrumental and vocal interpretation as well as insights into historical events and traditional forms of tango. Within this context, work has begun on reconstructing ways of dancing and interpreting tango, on granting a place to distinguished protagonists of tango, as well as on reappraising narratives and legends. This growing archive thus functions as a living place of tango. Regarding the critical aspects mentioned above, it is precisely for this reason that it is necessary to observe and, if necessary, change the methods and procedures of documentation and transmission in an open dialogue between all those involved (Kämpfe, 2018, pp. 266–270).

38

1  The Cultural Heritage of Dance and Research Practice

1.3.2.5 Ambivalences of the Evaluation The study on the nomination process of tango as an intangible cultural heritage allowed to trace processes of change at different levels. These mainly concern the processes of institutionalisation within the context of the nomination procedure. They can be observed in the changes of interests, ways of acting and treatment of individual elements and actors of tango, in the changes of narratives and meanings in and about the world of the tango, as well as in the possibilities of safeguarding cultural expressions as a living heritage. Two lines of argumentation became apparent. Thus, a positive conclusion was formulated insofar as a process of awareness-­ raising had taken place among the stakeholders. In this context, it was observed that the topic of intangible cultural heritage and the great importance of cultural expressions for social development was increasingly recognised and discussed in public discourses. This ultimately means that the possibilities offered by the status of intangible cultural heritage have already become part of society’s ways of thinking and acting. The implementation of the contents of the Convention on the Safeguarding of the Intangible Cultural Heritage has already resulted, to some extent, in cultural forms of expression being assigned a greater value in the perception of the public and cultural policy. Furthermore, in the course of the mandatory measures for the implementation of the Convention’s contents, it has been achieved that meaningful possibilities for the safeguarding of a living cultural heritage are developed at the level of cultural policy and in public discourse. This also guarantees the safeguarding of the lived cultural expressions as well as their own narratives about their origins and self-perception, as well as about the historical documents and artefacts. This positive effect could be demonstrated accordingly for the example of tango. In the long run, an archive of the expressions and artefacts of tango has been created. It consists of, and constantly expands through the narratives and artefacts of the traditions of tango from its times of origin up to the present. These include scores, literary texts and reports, photographs, sound and film recordings, clothing, instruments, and other typical objects. This archive functions in the sense of an authentic development of the forms of expression of tango in the present time, in that the reference back to an original context of origin is always present. The nomination of cultural expressions as intangible cultural heritage can thus create conditions that allow them to be lived in their very own way and also to evolve. Moreover, these lived cultural practices will gain greater visibility and appreciation in the public consciousness. Such a process represents a change in the discourse of cultural policy. It can offer a perspective for a new approach to cultural practices and the values of the intangible and, as a consequence, initiate a new approach in cultural policy. A critical conclusion was formulated to the effect that the process of awareness-­ raising described did not emerge from the development of tango practice itself, but was initiated by external actors. In the case of tango, these were the Buenos Aires-­ based Academia de Tango in collaboration with political authorities, primarily the Argentinian Ministry of Culture. In the course of reconstructing the nomination process, two latent interests of this initiative were identified at the political level.

1.3  Case Study on the Intangible Cultural Heritage of Tango

39

These are, on the one hand, the intended political-populist strategy of presenting tango as a national representative good, and on the other hand, the establishment and exploitation of its marketability. These interests influenced the design of the implementation process of the obligatory measures in a discernible way. Although the safeguarding of the narratives, historical documents and artefacts can indeed be considered successful, this archiving process was, however, influenced by the new institutions that were created for this purpose and financed by cultural policy. A strong image shaping and selection strategy implemented for the purpose became apparent in the process of setting up the archive. Therefore, the desired authentic development of tango is called into question. In this respect, the study concluded that by being recognised as intangible cultural heritage, cultural expressions run the risk of losing their original distinctiveness and developing in a way that does not correspond to them. This may be especially due to latent interests of political appropriation or economisation for business and tourism. It means that cultural forms of expression are made to fit into predefined discourses and an image that serves the purpose is created. This in turn entails corresponding modes of action which, in the most extreme case, no longer correspond to the originality of the cultural forms of expression. This ultimately leads to the freezing of practices instead of the intended safeguarding of a living heritage (Kämpfe, 2018, p. 241/242). 1.3.2.6 Responsibility of Actors and Political Authorities In consequence, the nomination process for intangible cultural heritage cannot be judged conclusively and remains ambivalent. Is it possible to escape this positive-­ negative matrix? First and foremost, this calls for a constant and rigorous questioning of values, decisions, and motivations. Furthermore, despite all the critical aspects, the actors involved should retain their belief in the actual goal of safeguarding and communicating a living cultural heritage. At the same time, it is important to appeal to the responsibility of all actors involved and for them to be aware of the consequences of their actions. For, as the study made clear, the underlying interests and the way in which the intangible heritage is safeguarded play a decisive role in balancing the positive and negative aspects. The measures to be implemented cannot possibly cover and take into account the entire range of cultural expressions in the short term. Initially, it will only be possible to create selected and limited archives of the living heritage or its reconstructions. These ultimately constitute a canon of elements, discourses, images, and facets of expressions. This effect cannot be prevented, but it is important to be aware of it at all times. But above all, action must be taken on the basis that the development of appropriate safeguarding measures, the archival work, and public discourses are as much changing processes as change itself is inherent in the living cultural heritage. The measures of safeguarding ultimately entail two scenarios. The negative aspect described corresponds to the so-called musealisation of cultural expressions. This means that their category-led and value-setting formalisation and standardisation in the context of the nomination process and in the further course of the

40

1  The Cultural Heritage of Dance and Research Practice

safeguarding measures has the effect that they are no longer exercised as authentic, but instead are staged in a prescribed manner in order to serve certain interests and discourses. The described positive aspect is closely related to the notion of a continuous change. Due to the existing or created possibilities to refer back to the origins of the form of expression in question, as well as due to an easy access for interested parties to the practice, living intangible heritage can be preserved and developed further in the midst of society. At the same time, this invalidates the concept of authenticity as an unchanging original. Instead, an understanding of an authentic cultural heritage as a constantly changing, locally differentiated cultural practice that evolves between the conflicting poles of localisation and globalisation can then prevail. In conclusion, it is the responsibility of all stakeholders, be they politicians, public figures, or practitioners, to preserve the range of possibilities that intangible cultural heritage offers and to use them in a positive way. With regard to the political management of a successful cultural heritage policy, this means that the processes of cultural change as well as the social functions of cultural practices must be taken into account. Debates cannot only be about the formalities, techniques, and practices of safeguarding, but must also include the selection of practices to be nominated, as well as their functions and values (Kämpfe, 2018, pp. 271–304). Cultural expressions as recognised intangible cultural heritage are a topic worth discussing. It calls for a critical-reflective process in order not to exploit the status of cultural heritage or to lead it ad absurdum. Instead, this status should be understood as an opportunity for a lively development of cultural expressions. This also means that this debate can serve as an impulse for reflection and awareness of a country’s own cultural heritage. This chapter will therefore first attempt to define the concept of the intangible with regard to such a discussion, and then elaborate on the social and scientific value of cultural expressions, in particular those of movement and dance.

References Bibliography Albert, M.-T., & Ringbeck, B. (2015). 40 years world heritage convention. Popularizing the protection of cultural and natural heritage. De Gruyter. Alkemeyer, T., Brümmer, K., Kodalle, R., & Pille, T. (Eds.). (2009). Ordnung in Bewegung. Choreographien des Sozialen. Körper in Sport, Tanz, Arbeit und Bildung. transcript. Barone, T., & Eisner, E. W. (2012). Arts-based research. Sage. Bippus, E. (2010). Zwischen Systematik und Neugierde. Die epistemische Praxis künstlerischer Forschung. Gegenworte, 23, S.20–S.25. Bischof, M., & Lampert, F. (Eds.). (2020). Sinn und Sinne im Tanz. Perspektiven aus Kunst und Wissenschaft (Jahrbuch Tanzforschung Bd. 30). transcript. Bockrath, F., Boschert, B., & Franke, E. (Eds.). (2008). Körperliche Erkenntnis. transcript.

References

41

Bourdieu, P. (1976). Entwurf einer Theorie der Praxis auf der ethnologischen Grundlage der kabylischen Gesellschaft. Suhrkamp. Bourdieu, P. (1987). Sozialer Sinn. Kritik der theoretischen Vernunft. Suhrkamp. Bourdieu, P. (1992a). Die Verborgenen Mechanismen der Macht. Schriften zu Politik & Kultur 1. VSA. Bourdieu, P. (1992b). Rede und Antwort. Suhrkamp. Bourdieu, P. (1993). Soziologische Fragen. Suhrkamp. Bourdieu, P. (1998). Praktische Vernunft. Zur Theorie des Handelns. Suhrkamp. Bourdieu, P. (2001). Meditationen. Zur Kritik der Scholastischen Vernunft. Suhrkamp. Bourdieu, P., & Wacquant, L. J. D. (2006). Reflexive Anthropologie. Suhrkamp. Brandstetter, G., & Wulf, C. (Eds.). (2007). Tanz als Anthropologie. Fink. Brandstetter, G., & Klein, G. (Eds.). (2015). Methoden der Tanzwissenschaft. Modellanalysen zu Pina Bauschs »Le Sacre du Printemps/Das Frühlingsopfer«. transcript. Caysa, V. (2015). Empraktische Vernunft. Peter Lang. Descartes, R. (1949). Briefe 1629–1650, o.A. Staufen Verlag. Descartes, R. (2005). Meditationes de Prima Philosophia. Meditationen über die Erste Philosophie. Reclam. (Paris 1641). Deutsche UNESCO-Kommission. (2007a). Memorandum. Immaterielles Kulturerbe in der Arbeit der UNESCO: neue Aufgaben, neue Herausforderungen. Online: https://www.unesco.de/ sites/default/files/2018-­04/Memorandum_2006%20Immaterielles%20Kulturerbe%20und%20 UNESCO.pdf. Letzter Zugriff: 27 Jan 2021. Deutsche UNESCO-Kommission. (2007b). UNESCOheute. Zeitschrift der Deutschen UNESCO-­ Kommission. Immaterielles Kulturerbe, 1 (54). Diaz-Bone, R. (2010). Kulturwelt, Diskurs und Lebensstil. Eine diskurstheoretische Erweiterung der bourdieuschen Distinktionstheorie. Leske+Budrich. Diehl, I., & Lampert, F. (Eds.). (2011). Tanztechniken 2010 – Tanzplan Deutschland. Henschel. Fischer-Lichte, E. (20163). Performativität. Eine Einführung. transcript. Fleischle-Braun, C., Obermaier, K., & Temme, D. (Eds.). (2017). Zum immateriellen Kulturerbe des Modernen Tanzes. Konzepte – Konkretisierungen – Perspektiven. transcript. Fried, J., & Stolleis, M. (Eds.). (2009). Wissenskulturen. Über die Erzeugung und Weitergabe von Wissen. Campus. Gehm, S., Husemann, P., & von Wilcke, K. (Eds.). (2007). Wissen in Bewegung. Perspektiven der künstlerischen und wissenschaftlichen Forschung im Tanz. transcript. Haarmann, A. (2019). Artistic Research. Eine epistemologische Ästhetik. transcript. Haller, M. (2014). Abstimmung in Bewegung. Intersubjektivität im Tango Argentino. transcript. Hörning, K. H., & Reuter, J. (Eds.). (2004). Doing culture. Neue Positionen zum Verhältnis von Kultur und sozialer Praxis. transcript. Huschka, S. (Ed.). (2009). Wissenskultur Tanz. Historische und zeitgenössische Vermittlungsakte zwischen Praktiken und Diskursen. transcript. Huschka, S. (2014). Zur Disposition eines verschwiegenen Wissens in Tanz oder die Kunst der Beziehungsstiftung. Online: https://wissenderkuenste.de/texte/ausgabe-­3/zur-­disposition-­eines-­ verschwiegenen-­wissens-­im-­tanz-­oder-­die-­kunst-­der-­beziehungsstiftung/. Letzter Zugriff: 27 Jan 2021. Kämpfe, V. (2018). Kulturerbe Tango. Tanz, Politik und Kulturindustrie. transcript. Klein, G. (Ed.). (2004). Bewegung. Sozial- und kulturwissenschaftliche Konzepte. transcript. Klein, J. (2011). Was ist künstlerische Forschung? kunsttexte.de/Auditive Perspectives, 2, 1–5. Knorr-Cetina, K. (2002). Wissenskulturen: Ein Vergleich naturwissenschaftlicher Wissensformen. Suhrkamp. Mey, G. (2018). Chapter 35: Performative Sozialwissenschaft und psychologische Forschung. In G. Mey & K. Mruck (Eds.), Handbuch qualitative Forschung in der Psychologie. Springer. Odenthal, J. (2019). Das Jahrhundert des Tanzes. Ein Reader. Alexander Verlag. Quinten, S., & Schroedter, S. (Eds.). (2016). Tanzpraxis in der Forschung  – Tanz als Forschungspraxis. Choreographie – Improvisation – Exploration. transcript.

42

1  The Cultural Heritage of Dance and Research Practice

Reckwitz, A. (20082). Die Transformation der Kulturtheorien. Zur Entwicklung eines Theorieprogramms. Velbrück Wissenschaft. Stekeler-Weithofer, P. (2005). Philosophie des Selbstbewußtseins. Suhrkamp. Stepputat, K. (2014). Tango, the not quite intangible cultural heritage. In E. I. Dunin (Ed.), Dance, narratives, heritage. Dance as intangible and tangible cultural heritage. 28th Symposium ICTM Study Group on Ethnochoreology: Korcula, Croatia (pp. 334–341)

Chapter 2

The Intangible in the Context of Performative Situations

This chapter will first look at two perspectives on the concept of the intangible, which are crucial in the argumentation of a cultural heritage of dance. Then, the values of the intangible that are to be highlighted will be illustrated using the example of dance practices. Based on the specific aspects of the performative and the understanding of materiality that emerge in this process, the concepts of movement material and its processes of becoming in situations of dance will be discussed with regard to the materiality of the intangible.

2.1 Perspectives on the Intangible In order to analyse the two perspectives on the concept of the intangible, its definition in the corresponding UNESCO Convention will first be explored. Following this, the sociological discourse on movement will be used to work out the extent to which the intangible is understood as an implicit knowledge. It will become evident that it stands for constitutive values and functions in relation to all socio-cultural processes. Finally, aspects of the performative are discussed in relation to the intangible.

2.1.1 The Intangible in the Terms of the UNESCO Convention While the importance of monuments on the UNESCO World Heritage List for the cultural self-understanding humanity is undisputed, the role of intangible cultural heritage practices is controversial. However, since the universally valued monuments are the results of intangible cultural practices, this discussion is particularly surprising. Christoph Wulf: Anthropology of Cultural Diversity, p. 65

© The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2023 V. Kämpfe, Dance Practices as Research, Heritage Studies, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-30581-8_2

43

44

2  The Intangible in the Context of Performative Situations

In this first perspective, the understanding of the intangible is a result of the discussion about the conception and implementation of the underlying idea of World Heritage. The term is formulated as a consequence of this critical debate in the UNESCO Convention for the Safeguarding of the Intangible Cultural Heritage of 2003. In this conceptual delimitation, it is initially set as an antithesis to the tangible, but in the course of the discussion it increasingly proves to be complementary to and inseparable from the tangible. In the text of the Convention, the concept of the intangible does not only refer to intellectual ideas, concepts, world views, systems of norms, or linguistic modes of communication, but it also includes, in particular, practices, forms of representation and expression with their immanent knowledge and skills. Furthermore, the instruments, objects, and cultural spaces associated with the respective intangible cultural heritage are also included. This has already been discussed in more detail in the first section of the previous chapter. In these definitions, the close relationship between tangible artefacts and intangible facts becomes apparent. Because every cultural practice performed needs a medium of action and transmission. These are, for example, the human body for moving and articulating, and also instruments and tools for carrying out the techniques as well as the objects and things to be worked on. Additional conveying media are the material or infrastructural conditions to be used for the practice, such as spaces or localities and natural landscapes, buildings, and artefacts. This also includes the media for storing and communicating cultural forms of expression or craft techniques such as texts, documents, images, soundtracks, etc. The conceptual differentiation between tangible and intangible only becomes conceptually discernible at the moment when it was necessary to correct a decisive aspect of the World Heritage concept through critical discussion. The underlying interest was to broaden the scope of the idea of World Heritage through the conceptual differentiations and extensions. These correlations were presented in more detail in the first section of the previous chapter. Despite this conceptual differentiation, the inseparability of the tangible and the intangible is already taken into account and clearly formulated in the wording of the text of the 2003 Convention. Thus, a connection between various forms of expression and a definition of and for intangible cultural heritage is considered a given. For example, the human body is described as the most important medium of intangible cultural heritage. This is at the same time linked to the recognition that cultural practices have the performative character of processes. Accordingly, the appropriation, communication, and transmission of intangible cultural heritage practices are largely based on bodily and sensory-aesthetic processes and imitation. This is reflected in the provisions of the Convention in the fact that the primary modes of transmission of intangible cultural heritage from one generation to the next is mostly through their actual (bodily) practice and oral communication; in this process of transmission it is continuously reshaped. Through this transmission, which is tied to individuals and constant communication, a sense of identity and continuity is conveyed within the practicing communities (cf. Fleischle-Braun et al., 2017, pp. 10–12).

2.1  Perspectives on the Intangible

45

2.1.2 The Intangible as Implicit Knowledge and Performative Process The so-called intangible and the tangible are only two sides of the same coin. In the case of cultural heritage, they cannot be separated. [...]The Cologne Cathedral, too, is ultimately only faith turned into stone, the expression of an attitude to life and testimony to traditional craftsmanship. Roland Bernecker: UNESCO Today 1/2007, p. 16/17

If one focuses on forms of expression and techniques in dance practice, these definitions are even more pronounced. In the following sections, this will be illustrated by tracing two crucial characteristics of dance practices in the context of their designation as intangible. Firstly, they refer to incorporated skills and knowledge, referred to as a specific tacit knowledge. On the other hand, they are characterised as performative processes that generate reality and at the same time are subject to constant change and development. 2.1.2.1 Implicit Knowledge of Cultural Practices The mentioned determinations of the intangible, pay particular attention to incorporated knowledge. This knowledge exist only in and through the exercise of the practices in question. In the quote that prefaces this section, Roland Bernecker, Secretary-General of the German Commission for UNESCO until 2019, articulates the starting point of the controversy on material values. With regard to the perception and labelling of cultural goods and practices, their re-evaluation seems necessary. The consequence of this controversy ultimately lead to the conclusion that cultural elements cannot be comprehended and preserved in isolation. The fundamental argument for this is that no element works solely as a tangible or intangible component. This becomes particularly clear when looking at the expressions and techniques of dance and song. They stand for a body-bound way of acting, in which the body serves as a medium of execution and resonance. Furthermore, they are bound to material and spatial elements such as clothing, scores, instruments, spaces, places as well as to certain constellations of spatial, temporal, and material elements. Likewise, it is through narratives that buildings and monuments become meaningful. The knowledge and skills necessary for their construction and use underpin their functional or symbolic value. Lixinski understands this connection as a social and cultural process: One important definitional issue in the 2003 Convention is the idea that ICH refers not to the cultural objects, but rather to the social and cultural processes of which these objects are. Intangible cultural heritage can be defined in two different ways. On the one hand, as a concept which is dependent on tangible cultural heritage, it acts as the underlying culture to any given expression, encompassing the processes, skills, and beliefs leading to the creation of tangible works. In a way, it is the relationship of a people with its tangible cultural heritage. (Lixinski, 2011, p. 83/84)

46

2  The Intangible in the Context of Performative Situations

This insight into the inseparability of both aspects of a cultural fact, as well as their equally necessary function within social processes should consequently entail the appreciation of the connected knowledge. The way in which this consequence proves to be absolutely necessary is argued in relation to dance practices in the third chapter on the value of movement. The following section will first look at the extent to which the performance of cultural practices corresponds to social changes and developments. 2.1.2.2 Processes of Becoming and Change Following a conservative, value-oriented, positivist view of traditions and their unchanging continuation over generations that can be traced back to the nineteenth century, a similar way of thinking was initially able to establish itself with regard to the safeguarding of cultural goods and values. However, such a static understanding of cultural contexts presupposes the existence of absolute, objective, and universal values. These represent a fixed reference that can be invoked in order to ward off changes in traditions. Moreover, essentialising concepts of the true and authentic are based on them (Villaseñor Alonso, 2011, p. 28). A concept of authenticity, still formulated in this tradition of thought, was included in the Venice Charter of 1964 as an official definition, along with the concept of integrity. The term, however, since it concerned tangible cultural goods, it still referred to so-called immovable goods. Nevertheless, they were already recognised as living testimonies and bearers of intellectual messages. While integrity was still defined in relatively tangible terms such as wholeness and intactness, including precise requirements and obligations to provide evidence, a well-founded understanding of authenticity remained undefined (Albert & Ringbeck, 2015, p. 25/51). It was not until 30 years after Venice that the concept of authenticity, now associated with genuineness, was introduced in the Nara Document on Authenticity (Japan 1994) “in a reflection on post-colonial and post-modern criticism of its global applicability, and at the same time its overall inconsistency in essentialist instrumentality in both East and West” (quoted from Falser’s 2011 critique, in Albert & Ringbeck, 2015, p. 26). Thus, it was only logical to search for different connotations of the term within the discussion of the concept of cultural heritage.1 Going back to ancient philosophical debates about continuity, change and truth, the understanding of what is authentic is increasingly based on the concept of truthfulness in a discourse that expanded towards the end of the twentieth century.  In the 1980s, an initial discussion emerged in the context of the questioning of universal values on the part of cultural anthropology and environmental studies, as well as underlying values to be redefined. From this emerged a notion of the intrinsic value of things, formulated primarily as a particularistic, non-utilitarian and implicit value. In all likelihood, these approaches equally found their way into the further conceptual development of cultural heritage and, more broadly, intangible cultural heritage. For the discussion of an intrinsic value of things, reference to various authors can be made, in the field of philosophy among others to Bernard Williams and Christine Korsgaard, in anthropology Edward B.  Tylor, as well as Franz Boas and Clifford Geertz; cf. references in Villaseñor Alonso, 2011, p. 6/7. 1

2.1  Perspectives on the Intangible

47

This in no way refers to a static, fixed condition, but is oriented towards changes and creative activities in the actual practice related to the concrete World Heritage situation (quoted from Jokilehto 2006, in Albert & Ringbeck, 2015, p. 51). And only these can stand for an authentic practice of exercising, developing, and passing on a cultural heritage. The question of what is authentic in the sense of an essentialist and absolute definition must be rejected with recourse to the previously named argumentation. If one nevertheless wishes to maintain a concept of authenticity, new references to its determinability must be sought. Bourdieu’s concept of sincerity could be useful for this purpose. Bourdieu defines sincerity as one of the preconditions of symbolic efficacy. It is “possible only when there is a perfect, immediate correspondence between the expectations inscribed in the position taken and the dispositions of the position-holder” (Bourdieu, 1999, p. 266). All the behaviours, skills, social assignments, and interests internalised by the actor must coincide for an authentic performance of practices to be possible. If this moment is interrupted by external influences, practices are either performed as a following of rules or in the mode of a performance scenario in an inauthentic way (ibid.).2 In terms of performing cultural practices, this means rehearsing, performing, and presenting cultural practice such as traditional rites, customs, or crafts for an interested audience. An external influence in this context is usually an economic interest (cultural tourism) or a political interest (image-building of a nation). Such intervention in a cultural practice is usually rooted in a view of cultural expressions as unchanging, rigid traditions. In contrast, the provisions of Article 2 of the 2003 Convention formulate the insight and necessity that intangible cultural heritage is “constantly recreated by communities and groups in response to their environment, their interaction with nature and with their history[...]”.3 This makes room for an understanding of authenticity that frames the processual nature of the exercise and continuation of cultural practices as a fundamental characteristic. If one examines the (re)definition of the terms further, it becomes clear that the authentic practice or transmission of cultural forms of expression such as dance and song is based on personal communication as another fundamental characteristic. This is supported by the fact that the incorporated knowledge is necessarily person-­ bound (ibid.). Thus, communication and presence tied to individual actors and concrete situations is a condition for the practice, transmission and thus safeguarding of practices. A person-bound transmission then also includes concrete situation-­ dependent moments, such as temporal and spatial conditions as well as individual  Furthermore, with regard to a broader perspective of the discussion on authenticity, reference can be made to Garcia Canclini with examples from the Mexican nomination process for cultural heritage. Cf. on this Garcia Canclini, 1999, especially pp. 29–32. From the perspective of the Mexican nomination process for cultural heritage Garcia Canclini demands: “cualquier política patrimonial debe tratar los objetos, los edificios y las costumbres de tal modo que, más que exhibirlos hagan inteligibles las relaciones entre ellos, propongan hipótesis sobre lo que significan para quienes hoy los vemos o evocamos. Un patrimonio reformulado que considere sus usos sociales, no desde una mera actitud defensiva, de simple rescate, sino con una visión más compleja de cómo la sociedad se apropia de su historia, puede involucrar a nuevos sectores.” ibid, p. 33. 3  Cf. the text of the Convention for the Safeguarding of the Intangible Cultural Heritage. Article 2 Definitions. Available online: https://ich.unesco.org/en/convention (last access: 27.01.2021). 2

48

2  The Intangible in the Context of Performative Situations

states of mind or physical dispositions, but also specific prior knowledge. It becomes clear how singular each moment is in which cultural practice is carried out. This is what the few sections of provisions for intangible cultural heritage in the 2003 Convention are able to point to, despite its broad scope and open terminology with regard to the concrete application in cultural practice. They allow for the recognition and consideration of the fact that cultural practices do only exist in the situational and personal presence in in relation to the present circumstances of their practice. As soon as this constellation is denied the opportunity to adapt or change according to the circumstances and prevailing conditions, cultural practice is deprived of its very basis of existence. Thus, the exercise of cultural practices is at the same time a process of becoming and changing, which only under this condition generates cultural practice in the sense of intangible cultural heritage. The recognition of these two fundamental characteristics of cultural practice  – its implicit knowledge and its process character  – is connected with the negation of values considered to be absolute and presupposes a constant process of development and change. An authentic development – of an individual, society, or cultural practice – now equally stands for change. This leads to the question of the possibilities and limits of changes to this incorporated knowledge and the situational conditions. The possible changes themselves are already given the concrete situatedness of a moment as options. They are constantly renegotiated by the actors involved within the concrete social situation. Society in the understanding of a (human) culture and its cultural practices already contains change within itself. And only then is it authentic (Kämpfe, 2018, pp. 282–284). The safeguarding moment for cultural practices consequently does not refer to a fixed constellation or handling, but primarily means the singular and symbolic values that constitute their peculiarity and special characteristics. For tango, presented as a case study in the first chapter, these singular and symbolic values mean, for example, the special attitude to life of the melancholic, of dialoguing or communicating in or towards a social group, as well as the hybrid moment of its origin. The associated symbolically charged artefacts are, for example, the various types of media: in the medium of writing, the poetry, stories, inscriptions on objects and venues, the music scores; in the medium of image, the photographs and pathos formulas such as the portrait of Carlos Gardel; in the medium of the body, dancing and making music; in the medium of place, the bars, streets, brothels and the city of Buenos Aires. This includes the symbolically codified physical modes of expression and behaviour as well as the specific habitus associated with tango. In combination, these form the cultural practice to be safeguarded (cf. Kämpfe, 2018, p. 288/FN72). With recourse to the discourse of cultures of memory and remembrance, the concept of living culture is formulated on the basis of this definition. It refers to a shared knowledge that supports a cultural identity by providing forms of recognition and enabling similar experiences without claiming them as absolute values.4  Reference should be made to the concepts of collective memory according to Assmann & Assmann, 1987, as the history inscribed in cultural media and modes of communication; as well as incorporated history of movements, gestures and lifestyles; cf. in particular, concepts of dance studies and cultural studies in Klein, 2004; Wulf, 2005; Assmann, 20063. 4

2.1  Perspectives on the Intangible

49

2.1.3 The Intangible in the Perspective of the Performative I think that in the doctrines of representation and scientific objectivity, the world is just getting lost. Donna Haraway in Barad: Agential Realism, p. 15

Is it possible that the concept of the performative is the resolution for the seemingly difficult interweaving of practices, things, circumstances, conditions, processes of becoming and meanings, in order to make the ambiguous character of the intangible cultural heritage conceptually comprehensible? The philosopher Karen Barad, who holds a doctorate in theoretical physics, offers a way of exploring such a line of thought with her argumentation. For her, performativity ‘properly understood’ does not necessarily mean putting all relations into words, as is suggested by Austin’s speech act theory. She actually breaks with the excessive power granted to language to determine what is real. She challenges “the representationalist belief in the power of words to represent things that already exist. Unlike representationalism, which situates us above or outside the world we supposedly only reflect upon, a performative approach emphasises the understanding of thinking, observing, and theorising as practices of engaging with and being part of the world in which we exist” (Barad, 2012, p.  9). Scientific knowledge determined as being cognitiverepresentational causes a linguistic-reflective distancing from its object of knowledge. It neglects the reciprocal and constant processual interweaving of discourses and materialities in the constitution of what is perceived as reality. Only the critical performative turn, critical of this, developed the concept of the performative situatedness for this purpose. A person acts within the perceived reality, acts and becomes, negates and recognizes in it. The non-recognised nevertheless exists, it is perceived on a non-­cognitive level, but is not translated into a cognitive-linguistic form. In conclusion, Barad raises the question of the extent to which language is then still more trustworthy and – ergo – more truthful than matter itself (Barad, 2012, pp. 8–10). This calls for a post-humanist, performative approach that liberates cognition from the anthropocentric limitation of language and leads it into a performative position of cognition. Such an agentive-realist ontology allows for a situation of cognition in the midst of the interweaving of becoming, being and materialities, related to practices, activities and actions. Fundamental to this is the understanding that the linguistic separation of material and non-material categories used to describe the characteristics of the world – and thus what is to be known – is nothing more than a discursive illusion. More specifically, she ascribes an agentiality to matter that cannot be determined in a linguistically limiting way. Matter is neither fixed or given, nor the result of various processes (ibid., p. 14). Properties attributed to things and objects do not exist in themselves, but they are, on the contrary, part of a situational phenomenon and emerge in processes and moments through agentive interactions. Thus, for Barad, the givenness of things is understood as a dynamic process of interactivity and materialisation. The world turns out to be an open process of materialisation and formation of relevance, in that different possibilities of action are realised and thus forms and meanings are generated and set (ibid., p. 16/17 and

50

2  The Intangible in the Context of Performative Situations

also pp. 19–21).5 If, with regard to the determinations and contexts of the intangible, one wishes to escape the familiar paths of thinking (about) the world in its material or non-material conditions, one should try one of her thought experiments. Barad considers redefining the concepts of matter and materiality for this purpose. She proposes to understand matter as a process of materialisation that proves stable in a moment. In this way, a momentary determination of the properties of limitation, solidity, and surface that characterise matter can be established as a materiality. Matter is therefore always something that has become matter. This process of materialisation into a momentary state in materiality means at the same time that matter cannot be a static entity, nor does it have a discursively fixed meaning a priori. Matter, for Barad, ultimately refers to implicit historicity and an articulation of surrounding circumstances. A conceptual definition that can serve as a foundation for the concept of the tangible or intangible heritage of objects, practices, and phenomena. Moreover, it offers a conceptual option to reconsider even the human in its determinacy. For according to her view, the boundary between the human and the non-human is just as little fixed a priori. In contrast, the human is only determined in the linguistic-discursive reflection on named situational, agentive interactions. Last but not least, she integrates the discourse practices themselves into this circle of thought. Just like material phenomena, they do not exist in a distancing relation to what the world means, but the material and the discursive are mutually involved in the dynamics of agential interactions. Discourse practices are thus equally understood as (re)configurations of the world through which the determination of materiality, as well as its properties, boundaries, and meanings, is accomplished (Barad, 2012, pp. 31–41). Barad already exhorts us to take matter seriously in her essay on Agential Realism, first published in 2003. This is an interesting starting point in regard to the underlying problem in the definition of the intangible that was pointed out before. The practices relevant to the intangible, or more concretely to the intangible cultural heritage, are almost exclusively practices that, on the one hand, have non-material attributions (knowledge, skills, traditions, forms of expression, etc.) and can be characterised to a high degree as performative and processual; on the other hand, however, they are always constitutively tied to material components such as actors or their corporeality, spaces, natural and manufactured objects, artefacts, etc. It is now only logical that not only the intangible is already thought in conjunction with the tangible component, but that the tangible also does not exist without the intangible component. The artefacts created by humans equally exhibit processes of developing knowledge and skills, of changes in their meanings, of their production or realisation with the necessary human actions, knowledge, and temporal determinations. They are not simply there and valuable, but are subject to the same performative processes of becoming. In conclusion, it is not only a matter of giving the concept of the intangible its due appreciation, but above all of questioning the  For a better understanding it should be pointed out that Barad refers in her argumentation to the physicist and Nobel Prize winner in quantum theory Bohr. In his studies, he already demonstrated that things cannot have a fixed entity of boundaries and properties. 5

2.2  Dance Practices and the Designation as Intangible

51

understanding of the tangible in contemporary discourses. The prevailing notion of the tangible as a static constant should, in my opinion, be rethought in favour of a performative process in constant flux. Once the cognitive separation of tangible and intangible aspects of what exists is abandoned, it becomes clear that social contexts are performative and develop through artefacts created by practices and practices that are in turn connected to such artefacts. Artefacts and practices exist as a social situation in a constant and reciprocal process of becoming and changing, corresponding to the moment; at the same time, this social situation is a specific medium of articulation and self-understanding of a cultural  – in the sense of a spatio-­ temporally located – mode of existence.

2.2 Dance Practices and the Designation as Intangible Dance already disappears in the moment of its creation Basic thesis of volatility according to Siegel Coincidence of the dance moment with the presence of the dancer Opposite pole of the full presence according to Louppé

2.2.1 Symbolic Value of Dance Practices But back to the dance practices and the search for options of their determination in order to potentially be able to integrate them into a theoretical approach such as the one presented above. With reference to the definition of intangible cultural heritage in the text of the Convention, the term dance does not only refer to certain practices as forms of performance and expression with their immanent knowledge and skills. It also refers – as was shown in the first chapter with the forms of expression of modern dance – to spiritual and intellectual concepts, ideas, world views, systems of norms or non-linguistic modes of communication. Furthermore, instruments, objects, and cultural spaces that are related to the respective dance heritage are included. The special quality of dance practices lies in their connection to corporeality, in their specific spatio-temporal location and processuality. At the same time, they require skills, physical dispositions, and the implicit knowledge of the correct way to perform them. Thus, they are tied to knowledge that is archived – and exclusively – in the body. Moreover, their recognition as intangible cultural heritage by the supranational organisation UNESCO declares them worthy of the cultural heritage status. They are now officially considered socially valuable and constitutive. Going back to Bourdieusian theorems, this process of recognition signifies a legitimisation of dance practices as symbolic capital. Symbolic capital is an extension of Bourdieu’s basic types of capital. The different types of capital can transform into this form of capital within social contexts (Bourdieu, 1992, p. 140 as well as Bourdieu, 1998, p. 108/109). It is understood as

52

2  The Intangible in the Context of Performative Situations

an abstract value that is meaningful and constitutive of action within the field. Bourdieu refers to symbolic capital as an “actual or potential force, power or capacity [as which] a capital [first] exists and acts” (Bourdieu, 2001, p. 311). Thus, symbolic capital functions as the very, albeit unconscious, impetus for actors to act with and through practices. This is because symbolic capital can only be practically effective if it is equally recognised and acknowledged on the part of all actors involved. By assuming the value of symbolic capital, a type of capital thus stands for values, meanings, and for the specific sense of the corresponding social situation (ibid., p. 213). By granting dance practices a heritage status, their implicit knowledge and associated processes of practice are recognised as relevant and constitutive of social development. They are given a symbolic value through the heritage title (cf. in Kämpfe, 2018, p. 41/42 as well as p. 287).

2.2.2 Attributes Assigned to the Intangible: Ephemerality and Presence In addition to this classification of dance practices in the perspective of a theoretical-­ structural positioning, it is also a question of examining the attributes assigned to dance, to what extent they can be useful categories for determining the intangible. In the discourse on dance, the two concepts of ephemerality and presence are often mentioned. The term ephemeral was initially a distinctive label for dance practices. It has increasingly been subjected to criticism.6 Lepecki points to Siegel as one of the initiators of the debate on this term, who introduced it into the discussion as early as 1972. Her main thesis was that dance already disappears in the moment of its creation. But this moment of creation at the same time includes components that can in no way be described as unambiguously ephemeral. These include, for example, the physical training carried out in the run-up to a dance practice (called bodywork as well as movement work in the dance discourse) or also the permanent involvement in the material and situational conditions in the moment of dance. The dancer, on the other hand, reduced to the fleetingness of his action, becomes a tragic figure outside of present social moments in Siegel’s work. Lepecki formulates a  In the perspective of art history and sociology of art, dance is mostly classified as part of the field of theatre or performance. The conceptualisation of dance is avoided to the extent that it is characterised as contingent and ephemeral, characteristics that are already associated with it in the academic discourse as a stigma. Cf. among others Helen in Thomas 1995, p. 10. Helen specifies: “As a result of this the reality of dance seems more elusive than painting and literature, which are relatively fixed in appearance. The absence of a universally accepted system for the recording and safeguarding of dances contributes to the difficulty of fixing dance’s identity, and of grasping a strong sense of its traditions.” ibid. From the perspective of sociology, the lack of connection to media of realisation and storage (texts, image media, objects/artefacts) associated with its contingency also seems responsible for the observed marginalisation. ibid., p.  21. Thomas refers to Susanne Langer (1953 and 1957) as one of the few works before the performative turn that dealt with dance in a scientific way. cf. ibid., p. 10. 6

2.2  Dance Practices and the Designation as Intangible

53

critical position on this: “In Siegel’s work, the long years of dance training, the conditioning of body and mind for the fleeting moment of dance, are only the embrace of a subjectivity willing to sacrifice itself, the creation of a mode of being-­ in-­the-world that represents nothing other than a lifetime of rehearsal and performance in an endless succession of live burials. It seems as if existence at the vanishing point transforms years of practicing, learning, creating, and dancing into years of anticipatory mourning and repetitive, retrospective melancholy. In these circumstances, the dancer is always already an absent presence in the field of vision, somewhere between past and future” (Lepecki, 2006, p. 183; reference for Siegel 1972: At the Vanishing Point). The critique would like to see the dancer integrated into the social process. In this context, Louppé describes the coincidence of the dance moment, as an instant, with the presence of the dancer as an essential quality of the dance act. The notion of ephemerality finds its counterpart in the complete presence of the dancer in the dance moment (Louppé, 2009, p. 135). In this context, the space in which the dance moment is created is important. The created dance space is understood as shaping an inner emotional or an imaginary world: “The dancer lives from the space and from what the space creates in him. [...] Of course, on the dancer’s part, it is not a question of ‘treating’ space, in the sense of an objective element to be handled by constructing it” (Louppé, 2009, p. 155). Louppé goes on to connect this with bodywork: “That individual inner space is brought to life by its own texture and dynamics. This life depends on the work of the body that brings it forth” (ibid., p. 167). By locating the dance in actual space (movement choreography) and by binding it to the corporeality of the performing dancers (the bodywork in training and the execution in the danced moment), it is no longer reduced to the fleeting moment. Dance does not disappear after the moment of its presence in the present. Dance practices are, moreover, constitutive elements of that very moment and its material and situational conditions. They refer to constitutive categories for the present moment of dance: space and time of training (knowledge transfer and bodywork), given infrastructures of preparation and performance (institutional structures and material conditions), options of thinking, experiencing and feeling (categories of perception and action), the acting dancers and spectators. Furthermore, movement itself seems to be a self-evident necessity for dance moments. At the same time, movement proves to be an equally ambiguous category for describing the intangible, because it equally refers to the material categories of space and body. As a starting point for a definition of movement, Eikels/Wortelkamp suggest, the “change in location of a body over time could be considered. Movement thus represents the elementary relation of space and time and at the same time a definiens of corporeality” (Eikels/Wortelkamp in Klein, 2004, p. 50). Moreover, this makes movement a decisive moment of perception. Kerstin Evert starts from this aspect of dynamisation and takes it to a more radical level with the proposal regarding dance practices in research practice. She proposes to not start from the noun movement, but to develop “approaches for an artistic (research) procedure through the praxeological examination of the verb moving” (Evert in ibid., p.  51). This means that the focus is no longer on the bodies of the dancers or performers, but that

54

2  The Intangible in the Context of Performative Situations

the bodies take on the function of mediators or intermediate spaces through and in which the various participants can interact. This clarifies the performative connections of all aspects involved in the dance moment as well as their constant fluctuation between being assigned to the tangible or intangible. This call for the use of verb confirms the decision made in the introduction to replace the term dance as far as possible with the concept of dance practices or dance situations and processes.

2.2.3 Snapshot Dance Taking these argumentative approaches further, dance practices eventually lead to a moment that is called dance. This connection can be summarised in a thesis-like manner in the following way: the moment of dance consists in an – intuitive, conscious, or unreflected  – execution of movements on the basis of values that are ascribed individually or within the discursive framework of aesthetics, that goes beyond the physical movement. The artistic practices can be seen as a reversed path, leading from the bodily practice of training and dancing to an aesthetic or ideological value of a performative action. As constitutive for the moment of dance, a multitude of manifold aspects could be elaborated in the course of this argumentation so far. This is fundamentally the physical work of training, rehearsing, and performing, as well as the resulting quality of movement in the performance of dance practices in the understanding of the incorporated and individualised motor skills and modes of expression. Furthermore, this includes the materialities necessarily connected with the dance practices, such as one’s own body, dance clothing, objects and artefacts used for training and performance, but also the nature of the space for movement (wall and floor material, doors, windows and ventilation, colouring, objects in the space, floor plans and elevations) as well as the sensory-aesthetic experiences connected with materials and spaces. There are processes corresponding to this moment, such as the incorporation of specific abilities, situations, constellations of the personal, infrastructural, and material conditions, as well as the generation or exercise of implicit knowledge. Not to forget the processes of production of dance moments, their transmission in person and through media, the individual and social reception and comprehensibility, as well as the processes of formalisation and attribution of value by institutions and the public connected with productions and performances. Thus, the moment of dance, as well as the totality of the dance practices associated with it, stand for a social situatedness and is at the same time constantly on the point of changing and developing. In the following section, this intricate web of the most diverse aspects of an intangible and tangible interconnectedness in dance moments is further examined with the help of a theoretical basis provided by Skrandies (cf. on this in Kelter & Skrandies, 2016). This mental detour, which leads from the movement material to performative processes of becoming, can provide valuable approaches for the argumentation towards detaching dance situations from the ambiguity of tangible and intangible labels attributed to them and being able to describe the complexity of dance processes more appropriately.

2.3  Movement Material in Performative Processes of Becoming

55

2.3 Movement Material in Performative Processes of Becoming Movement is how material comes to be [...]. Material is the stabilisation of movement, one of its temporary consolidations. Kelter/Skrandies in Bewegungsmaterial, p. 9

The approaches to the intangible and, in particular, to dance practices presented in the context of this conceptualisation were already able to illustrate that the performative is tied to material, medial, infrastructural, and personal components. The performative does not take place incoherently. In the same way, learned knowledge of movement, artistic forms of expression, and aesthetic procedures, historical epistemes of corporeality, a powerful dispositive, institutional interests, technical and media ensembles, spatial conditions, and more are part of the processes of becoming within performative situations.

2.3.1 Materiality and Mediality Thus, media and materials are necessary components through which dance situations are constituted. They do not transmit in the sense of a medium, but unfold their own effectiveness: “Media do not simply transmit messages, but unfold an effective power that shapes the modalities of our thinking, perceiving, experiencing, remembering, and communicating” (quoted from Krämer 1998  in Kelter & Skrandies, 2016, p.  46). Thus, not only perception, but also meaning-making is generated within performative situations in the first place: “Mediality expresses that our relation to the world, and thus all our activities and experiences with the function of making sense of the world – and are not simply world-constituting – are shaped by the possibilities of distinction that media provide and the limitations that are imposed in the process” (ibid.). This multiplicity of media and materials includes language and verbalisations in the form of discourses and narratives about dance forms, training, practice, and performance. Images, illustrations, and pictures are also part of the canon of discourse around and about dance as well as dance practices. In addition, they are documents that refer to media and objects of historical and contemporary discourses on dance. These play into the agentiality of media within performative situations in the same way: “Everything changes as soon as body, dance, movement, material enter the space of the technical image. We are used to assuming that media simply store, transport, and communicate cultural meaning. Yet that meaning is not unaffected” (ibid.). Forms of media are actively involved in the constitution of cultural content or meaning according to the way they are used and how effective they are. Another component can be found in the corresponding spaces, bodies, materials, and devices in dance situations. They form materialities in the actual representational understanding. Movement itself, as a special materiality of dance production,

56

2  The Intangible in the Context of Performative Situations

is necessarily also part of it: “This material is never simply given as such, but must always be brought forth by the (dancing) body. The specific material of dance production is movement. Not every movement is dance  – only when movement becomes the material of production is it also dance. Dance, it could be said, is movement as material” (Vollmer in Kelter & Skrandies, 2016, p. 154). It is through movement that the states of mind, body techniques, and processes of knowledge, transmission and understanding that are constitutive of dance are first generated, acted out, and perceived: “In dance practice, both notions of material are interwoven with each other in a complex way: each individual dance movement is a moment of conscious, controlled production by a subject and a moment of contingency or even agency of the material” (ibid., p. 155). The subjects within these complex processes are ultimately the dancers who perform and transmit chosen forms of movement. On the basis of these attempts to define dance situations on a theoretical level, a scientific-theoretical gap becomes evident as to where the dance moment now lies and to what extent it is an intangible one. After the preceding considerations as to whether the intangible is a necessary condition of the performance of dance practices and how the intangible can be determined in isolation at all, the focus eventually shifts to processes in space and time, which are necessarily tied to materialities. A possibly different interconnection is revealed: materialities or corporealities found in dance situations are part of processes of becoming through bodywork within moments of space and time both as and in movement. They are acted out and perceived as dance practices in an aesthetic valuation. Consequently, it seems logical to ask how materialities – the trained bodies – are experienced as dance or as dancing. One thing has already become clear: the definition as intangible or ephemeral cannot fully capture the special characteristic of dance  – this composite of movement material, which is always in the process of becoming. This is described by Skrandies in his definition of the processual, which is in a state of being momentary, yet bound to materialities, in the quote that precedes this chapter. Taking the aspect of corporeality into account, he further explains: “Movement in dance materialises in a bodily and place-specific manner, consolidates and stabilises this place in an aesthetic way ‘body’ [...]” (ibid., p. 9). Following this line of thought, what does it mean to think of movement in terms of material, or what would material be without movement and what would movement be without material? Building on this, Skrandies uses the term of movement material to state that movement or the dance moment only reveals itself on and in materialities as well as through materialities. The (movement) material necessary for movement becomes dance in and through movement. Dance is thus described as a fleeting moment, but in constant interaction and with references of the production and reception, which in turn are tied to mediality or materialities. This implies an agentiality of the thing-like, personal, medial, but also institutional and aesthetic aspects within dance situations (ibid., p.12ff). Skrandies argues further that in dance, idea and form only emerge with and in the material or the body – by working with dance movement and necessarily associated (movement) material. He thus positions himself against the discursive devaluation of the concept of material, as the concept of the body suffers in a comparable way in the discourse on art and

2.3  Movement Material in Performative Processes of Becoming

57

culture. According to his argumentation, materiality and corporeality are already part of the creation of artistic or dance moments. He refers to Pina Bausch’s way of working, to modern expressive dance and to Forsythe’s choreographic practice. Here he is able to emphasise another aspect; a perceptible autonomous activity and thus the principal stubbornness of processes of materiality, which lies in their non-­ meaningful performativity. It happens irrespective of the importance of the performing subject and the sense-making in the dance situation. The process of becoming dance is determined in the same way by materiality and corporeality as by the sense-making idea and shaping by the performing subject. This proposes a notion of materiality “that does not aim at linking material to the tangible, but considers material as a context of action and relation” (ibid., p.155). This agentiality of the material and in particular of the material of movement, corresponds to a counter-referential relation of human and non-human elements and actors: they are the permanent processes of becoming dance using the parameters of procedure, becoming, stabilising, and standing still formulated by Skrandies. He locates this process of becoming dance in changing relations of elements and actors: the completed procedures conditioned by (working) spaces, instruments and techniques; the processes of becoming between form and ideas, whereby the material and media always stem from infrastructural and historical contexts; the standing still of the contexts of becoming – Skrandies speaks of a processual stabilisation and concentration of movement material in the scenarios of choreography (cf. ibid., p. 19). He defines these moments of transition as a game of becoming and emerging, which he already understands as the actual ontological stabilisation as dance. The movement material does not lose its originality, but by going through the process of aesthetic mediation of choreography it changes its mode of appearance and existence. Instead of defining the moment of the performance of dance as merely accidental, it exists as the already substantial mode in this balancing interplay of ontological stabilisation and its withdrawal (ibid.). In conclusion, dance finds itself determined as a moment to be described again and again in permanent processes of becoming movement in, through and as materiality.

2.3.2 Materiality of the Intangible What becomes clear in this argumentation: the specificity of dance material does not lie in the tangible or intangible, but in the relationship of the dancer within a moment of determining space, time, corporeality and materiality as well as depending on the medialities of the perception(s) of this moment. What then could the supposedly intangible still mean in these contexts of dance? How should the categories of tangible, intangible, and personal be differentiated? If the focus of the argumentation is placed on the concept of the intangible, this apparently leads to having to declare it null and void; and consequently, also its counterpart. A further reference at the moment of the annulment of established realities to the attribution of meaning for immateriality – incorporeal, of a purely mental nature or immaterial – intangible,

58

2  The Intangible in the Context of Performative Situations

incorporeal, mental (Dudenredaktion, 200924, p. 524) confirms the declaration of nullity. Dance movement and choreographic work are created within an entanglement of material, infrastructural, and so-called intangible components. In constant processes of becoming, they refer to the ties to corporeality and incorporated knowledge, to spatiality, sounds and temporality, but also to emotionality and affect, as well as perception and communication. After all, sensitivity and perception are located in a biological and thus physical organism. In dance situations, aspects of the material are virtually condensed into attributions of the intangible: forms are put to work; the space itself is part of the staging; a dance-specific body structure and the dance habitus are established in the physicality through incorporation processes; traces and sounds from the concrete dance situation remain. In addition, there are other more comprehensive materialities that emerge with, in, and through dance: for example, systematisations and media of transmission such as notations, writings, works, video, images of the choreographed form and exercised bodywork; schools, institutions, stages, and other suitable buildings, architectures and technical structures are required; this is accompanied by dance products such as events, merchandise, clothing, storage and recording media The dance moment, which has just been freed from the stigma of ephemerality, finds its safeguarding in archived forms through recordings and in written documents. It is remembered in an informal way, but also through the thought processes that were provoked and the emotions and emotions evoked. However, strictly speaking, the possibility to experience it can never be an exact repetition, since its perception and effect depend on the concrete situation that changes in each case. Furthermore, dance moments exist in larger contexts, be they individual, infrastructural, or socio-cultural. Thus, in the course of dance processes consisting of rehearsals, meetings, trainings, performances, reviews, conflicts and changes, they create their own atmospheres, procedures, processes, understandings, unique companies and their own infrastructural framework. These are perceived from the outside and imprint themselves on social processes. Thus, the intangible proves to be a necessary part of singular as well as social contexts, and the categorical separation of the intangible, tangible and personal is abolished. The actual significance of the complex conglomerate of an intangible - tangible as the movement material of performative processes that can be dance, is its similarity to the socio-cultural structure of society. If one wishes to grasp this dense conglomerate of dance moments scientifically, one must accordingly think beyond the boundaries of scientific epistemes and disciplines. Both in the dance performance itself and in its scientific recording process, given ways of knowing must be used and yet expanded, reformed and choreographed. Based on the preceding argumentation, there are three approaches or concepts that appear to be useful. The first concept of performance or performativity stems from the discourse of dance studies. It transforms the perception of dance as an intangible moment into a process linked to meaning, artistic conception, and infrastructural conditions.7 The second  Cf. in particular the works of Fischer-Lichte, 2004, 2016. The first section of the first chapter of this argumentation contains an approach to this concept. 7

References

59

concept of empraxis makes it possible to grasp the knowledge gained through practice that must be taken into account (not only) in dance processes. It is rooted in an understanding through the body’s own sensory perception. In this way, dance as empractical research is based on the tradition-rich epistemology of aesthetics, rich in tradition.8 The concept of movement material, which has been described above, ultimately brings the complex and diverse aspects of dance situations conceptually together in a processual and functional correlation. With this epistemological reflection as a background, we can now turn to movement as a category that underpins the moment of dance. It refers by way of example to the described performative context of dance situations and processes with regard to the ambiguity of tangible and intangible attributions. With this approach to a conceptualisation of movement, the aspects of recording, safeguarding, transmission, and valuation or significance of dance processes can be further explored.

References Bibliography Albert, M.-T., & Ringbeck, B. (2015). 40 years world heritage convention. Popularizing the protection of cultural and natural heritage. De Gruyter. Assmann, A. (20063). Erinnerungsräume. Formen und Wandlungen des kulturellen Gedächtnisses. Beck. Assmann, A., & Assmann, J. (Eds.). (1987). Kanon und Zensur. Archäologie der literarischen Kommunikation II. Fink. Barad, K. (2012). Agentieller Realismus. Über die Bedeutung materiell-diskursiver Praktiken. Suhrkamp. Bourdieu, P. (1992). Rede und Antwort. Suhrkamp. Bourdieu, P. (1998). Praktische Vernunft. Zur Theorie des Handelns. Suhrkamp. Bourdieu, P. (1999). Die Regeln der Kunst. Genese und Struktur des literarischen Feldes. Suhrkamp. Bourdieu, P. (2001). Meditationen. Zur Kritik der Scholastischen Vernunft. Suhrkamp. Dudenredaktion. (200924). Duden. Band 1. Bibliografisches Institut & F.A. Brockhaus AG. Fischer-Lichte, E. (2004). Ästhetik des Performativen. Suhrkamp. Fischer-Lichte, E. (20163). Performativität. Eine Einführung. transcript. Fleischle-Braun, C., Obermaier, K., & Temme, D. (Eds.). (2017). Zum immateriellen Kulturerbe des Modernen Tanzes. Konzepte – Konkretisierungen – Perspektiven. transcript. Garcia Canclini, N. (1999). Los usos sociales del Patrimonio Cultural. Aguilar Criado Encarnación. In Cuadernos Patrimonio Etnológico. Nuevas perspectivas de estudio (pp. 16–33). Consejería de Cultura, Junta de Andalucía. Kämpfe, V. (2018). Kulturerbe Tango. Tanz, Politik und Kulturindustrie. transcript. Kelter, K., & Skrandies, T. (Eds.). (2016). Bewegungsmaterial. Produktion und Materialität in Tanz und Performance. transcript. Klein, G. (Ed.). (2004). Bewegung. Sozial- und kulturwissenschaftliche Konzepte. transcript. Lepecki, A. (2006). Option Tanz. Performance und die Politik der Bewegung. Theater der Zeit (Routledge 2006).  On this, among others, Abraham in Quinten & Schroedter, 2016, pp. 9–36.

8

60

2  The Intangible in the Context of Performative Situations

Lixinski, L. (2011). Selecting heritage: The interplay of art, politics and identity. European Journal of International Law, 1(22), 81–100. Louppé, L. (2009). Poetik des zeitgenössischen Tanzes. transcript. Quinten, S., & Schroedter, S. (Eds.). (2016). Tanzpraxis in der Forschung  – Tanz als Forschungspraxis. Choreographie – Improvisation – Exploration. transcript. Villaseñor Alonso, I. (2011). El valor intrínseco del patrimonio cultural: ¿una noción aún vigente? Intervención. Revista Internacional de Conservación, Restauración y Museología, 3(2), 6–13. Wulf, C. (2005). Zur Genese des Sozialen: Mimesis, Performativität, Ritual. transcript.

Chapter 3

Performative Doing as a Living Archive of Cultural Practices

Within the context of the preceding terminological and conceptional framing of the definitions of an intangible cultural heritage, as well as of the intangible per se, and the understanding of dance practices, this chapter will look at related processes and mechanisms. Important aspects are especially the processes of incorporation and reproduction of body-bound knowledge as well as the processes of institutionalisation of hitherto informal practices. Special attention is paid to the concept of the archive in the opposition between the lived safeguarding and the writing down and thereby potentially creating fixed official versions of cultural heritage.

3.1 Movement as Value and Knowledge Order of the Intangible With recourse to the conceptual definition of dance practices, it is possible to conclude from the intangible aspects assigned to them that they can be understood as an order of knowledge tied to bodily movement. On the one hand, this refers to the recognition of this knowledge as of value and use for social development. This primarily means their integration into processes of reproduction and disciplining as a part of socialisation in social groups and thus also includes processes of education and research, and secondly their contribution to the processes of canonisation and archiving in the cultural memory. On the other hand, this recognition and appreciation refers to the exercise of this knowledge in everyday practice in the sense of a lived cultural heritage. The aim of this chapter is to approach the so-called forms of intangible knowledge or the corresponding bodies of knowledge, to which movement knowledge, and dance knowledge in particular, can be assigned, on a theoretical level. In order to ultimately name a scientifically relevant value of movement practices, it will first be a question of examining the knowledge order of body-­ bound knowledge more closely. For this purpose, concepts of body knowledge will © The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2023 V. Kämpfe, Dance Practices as Research, Heritage Studies, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-30581-8_3

61

62

3  Performative Doing as a Living Archive of Cultural Practices

be addressed first, because this was the starting point and also the turning point within scientific discourse for constituting a value of movement. Based on this, the sociology of movement provided a comprehensive concept of movement knowledge for the research discourse. Only on the basis of such a concept of movement can constructive concepts of a living heritage of dance and concepts for corresponding performative archives be formulated.

3.1.1 A Moved and Moving Research Discourse The body possesses a material autonomy […] and reacts within the framework of its possibilities and limits. At the same time, the body in this materiality is exposed to cultural influences and is a product of these formative influences, and moreover, it can only ever be perceived in a culturally specific way. Strauss/Anselm in Gugutzer: Sociology of the Body, p. 35

In the research discourse on movement and dance practices, it is unanimously agreed upon that movement practices manifest themselves through the interplay of three specific characteristics. These include their processual nature and encompass the aspects of their temporal and spatial embeddedness as well as their constant changes; furthermore, their fundamental and necessary connection to corporeality; and finally, the knowledge implicit in them and the corresponding, existing knowledge orders. Another important quality of movement practices characterised as performative is that they have to be performed by actors. In order to be able to comprehend this conceptual foundation and develop it further with regard to a living dance heritage, it should be a solid starting point to look at the concepts of incorporated knowledge and body knowledge from the perspective of sociology of the body and cultural anthropology. Movement studies then provide further dance-related aspects with the determinations of body-bound cognition, empractic body memory, and the realm of affects, emotions, and sensory impressions. This allows us to move on to the praxeological perspective in order to include its understanding of practices as the incorporation of social relations with the associated processes and mechanisms. 3.1.1.1 Discourses on Body Knowledge The motivation for the elaboration of a new epistemological perspective with a focus on body knowledge was to correct the intellectualist error within the canon of values in the humanities. According to Gugutzer, this consisted in overestimating the importance of theoretical thinking and knowledge following the Cartesian paradigm (Gugutzer, 2004, p. 107/108). This doubt about the established canon actually proved to be a constructive starting point to open the way for new knowledge and more advanced ways of knowing. The development of the concept of body knowledge can ultimately be traced back to the beginnings of the sociology of knowledge.

3.1  Movement as Value and Knowledge Order of the Intangible

63

Thus, references to corporeality and to bodily practices can be found in Scheler, Schmitz, Plessner, as well as Durkheim, Mauss, Merleau-Ponty, and Mead and Taylor. At the end of the twentieth century, with the body turn in the social and cultural sciences, began a widespread recognition of the relevance of body-theoretical reflections for sociological analyses (cf. Keller & Meuser, 2011; Gugutzer, 2004). This was preceded by two trend-setting concepts. One was the distinction between knowing what and knowing how developed by the philosopher Gilbert Ryle (1969). According to Ryle, practical action is not controlled by prior intellectual reflection, but human intelligence is directly involved in practical action. A second important concept was developed by the philosopher of science Michael Polanyi. In tracing how a conscious experience and knowledge functions in later moments as an unconscious incorporated skill, he conceived the concept of tacit knowledge (Polanyi, 1966). In German it is referred to as implicit knowledge. The starting point of his conceptualisation is the assumption that there is knowledge that humans are not consciously aware of in their actions or that cannot be understood or articulated, but which nevertheless has an effect on the way humans act (cf. summary in Keller & Meuser, 2011, among others). This concept of the body, which determines the two dimensions of an external and an implicit body knowledge, stringently pervades the literature. With regard to the different research approaches, body knowledge can be located on different levels. This means, first of all, knowledge about the body, which is thus declared an object of research; secondly, knowledge that circulates about the body in the form of a discourse; and finally, knowledge that is intrinsic to the body. Based on these three levels, it becomes apparent that body knowledge comes into play in both communication and interaction (incorporation processes), but also becomes recognisable as the body’s own sensing (corporeality), and is also found in the concrete performance of practices (performativity). In this broad breakdown, two perspectives of body knowledge can be formulated. One is an external body knowledge in the understanding of a knowledge about the body. It includes the two levels of body-object and body-discourse. It is a cognitive knowledge manifested in propositional form. The second perspective of body knowledge is knowledge implicit in the body and describes a knowledge of the body or through the body. It includes body-­ based communication, body-based sensing, and knowledge implicit to the practices performed. A linguization seems difficult here (cf. various contributions in Alkemeyer et al., 2009, among others). Within sociology of the body, storing this body knowledge in the form of incorporation and reproduction processes is seen as the fundamental function of corporeality. The social order is naturalised through this storage in the physical body of the actors in the sense of their socialisation. This means that to the individual actors this order appears to be self-evident and naturally given; at the same time, it is permanently reproduced by the actors’ actions. Thus, it becomes clear that this connection is fundamental for the overall order and development of society (cf. Gugutzer, 2004, 2006; Csordas, 1994; Alkemeyer et al., 2003, 2009, among others).

64

3  Performative Doing as a Living Archive of Cultural Practices

How these processes take place, however, remains unclear in the context of the development of these terms. Processes of mimesis and the motor control theory of sports science can provide starting points for explaining this gap with regard to the communication and storage of body knowledge. In both research fields, the body is the starting point of scientific knowledge. The concept of mimesis is based on the increasing focus on the body within the humanities since the 1970s/80s. Here, the reference to the materiality of the human body is fundamental for the understanding of social actions and social practice. Characteristic is, on the one hand, the interrelation between individual action and social constitution; and on the other hand, the necessary link of social action, communication and transmission processes, as well as social development to corporeality. If the body is to regain the status of a proper corporeal paradigm within scientific discourse, then its particular modes of experience and cognition must be taken into account. Such modes include materially and sensory experience, which contrasts with the indirect and conscious experience of thought; the necessary dependence on temporality; and a certain unreliability of experience based on sensory triggers, which includes sensory impressions such as smell, sensation, visual, tactile, and auditory perception. In the mimetic process, the transmission of knowledge works through bodily actions, movements, impressions, and experiences. It means the simple principle of showing and imitating as a complex process that takes place in the form of embodiment, that is, incorporation as an action in its own rights (cf. Wulf, 2005 as well as Gebauer & Wulf, 2003, among others). A second starting point promises the consideration of the motor control theory of sports science. It locates body knowledge in the actor, so that the abstract notion of incorporation is illustrated at the practical level of body mechanisms. Thus, body knowledge in movement science is understood as a body memory of movement and muscle mechanisms. It is closely tied to the aspects of a routine through training and exercise, the empractical elements of learning, and the unreflected aspects of routinised exercise. The body knowledge defined in this way is generated through a body memory. This means the constant recalling of a movement and muscle work of concrete movements that is simultaneously incorporated by the actor through the same practical processes. This mechanism functions through the training of movement and the necessary muscle work in constant repetition and in practical execution. This functioning, performing body knowledge is only located in practice, where it is experienced. The generation of this body knowledge takes place through a constant repetition of functioning actions or movement sequences. As a result, unconscious, functioning body-mechanical abilities are formed. Body knowledge as both the result and the process of training knowledge is also initially characterised within motor control theory as a mimetic process in which movements are learned through visual and verbal instruction. It is no longer perceived as acquired knowledge, but as a natural and unconscious doing. Furthermore, the aspect of the empractical is included in this process. The empractical is thereby tied to affects and transmitted by affects. Affects refers to, for example, feelings, hunches, and instincts. Furthermore, it is postulated that the functioning of movement practices is

3.1  Movement as Value and Knowledge Order of the Intangible

65

tied to associated feelings, moods, and states of mind. In training, these can be moods such as anger, fatigue, disappointment, and pain, which influence the functional performance of routinised movements (cf. Alkemeyer et  al., 2003, 2009; Gugutzer, 2004, 2006, among others). Taking these approaches of body knowledge and body-mechanical incorporation processes a step further, Bourdieu’s praxeological approach is based on the premises of practical knowledge and action knowledge. Bourdieu focuses his analyses of social functioning mechanisms on actors who act through body-bound practices and are embedded in complex structural networks. In doing so, he asks himself in what way the actors are determined by this or how they generate these structures through their actions at the same time. Bourdieu works out that action is fundamentally grounded in knowledge, both at the level of implicit knowledge (knowledge of action) and at the level of social knowledge orders (complex structural networks). Both levels are in a permanent dialectical and functional relationship of generating and communicating their respective knowledge. Thus, action is ultimately understood as the continuously occurring processes of incorporation and reproduction in which body knowledge is simultaneously incorporated and exercised. The concept of knowledge in the praxeological approach is consequently determined as a body-­ bound incorporated knowledge. This means that knowledge is not only to be understood as something that is mentally known or conscious, but also as a practical knowledge that is incorporated through practices and at the same time exercised through practices (c.f. for a summary Hörning & Reuter, 2004, various contributions in Gehm et al., 2007). The praxeological approach means at the same time a fundamental renewal of and decisive break with the paradigm of social and cultural theories or of subjective and objective explanations of cognition and action. This is because, due to the fact that action – and thus also the identification the correct, because effective, action within the surrounding social structural network  – is located in the physical and practical action of the individual actor, the meaning and effectiveness of the rationalistic and causal logic, which has prevailed in the humanities up to now, is overcome Bourdieu proclaims the logic of practice. The functioning of action is grounded in the exercise of it. This sets the epistemological foundation for postulating experiential knowledge as a knowledge through corporeality and the performance of action. The approach of the sociology of movement presented in the following section argues its terms and concepts of movement based on the discourse of body knowledge presented above and is grounded in the paradigm of practice (c.f. Hörning & Reuter, 2004; Hillebrand et al., 2006, among others). 3.1.1.2 An Emerging Sociology of Movement These concepts of body knowledge and corporeality must now be set in motion in order to move on to dance practices. The development of the related term knowledge of movement and, based on this, the term dance knowledge can be traced back

66

3  Performative Doing as a Living Archive of Cultural Practices

to the 1920s.1 However, there were always discontinuities in the perception, functionalisation, and evaluation of the relevance of movement practices, so that no usable terminology was determined until the time of the emergence of dance studies. In the context of the paradigm shifts in the social and cultural sciences, starting from the cultural turn and continuing with the body turn, performative turn and the practical turn, a renewed interest in movement practices and their theoretical and methodological approaches can be observed since the end of the 1990s. There has been a widespread recognition of the relevance of body-theoretical reflections for sociological analyses. In order to finally understand movement in terms developed specifically for this purpose, they refer to the academic theoretical approaches to body knowledge outlined earlier (cf. inter alia Gugutzer, 2006; Reckwitz, 20082) These included: • The concept of knowledge used in the mimesis concept as a body-bound practical knowledge as well as a performative and social knowledge. It describes their transmission processes as a demonstration+ and naturalising imitation. • The term body knowledge, as used in the sociology of the body and culture, is characterised by the double perspective of external and implicit body knowledge. It refers at the same time to the differentiation between the lived body (Leib) and the physical body, as well as to affects and sensory perceptions. • Knowledge concepts of movement sciences, in particular of sports science/motor control theory, which determine body knowledge as body memory of movement and muscle memory – empractical and unconscious – in the sense of knowledge through execution. • The concept of knowledge and cognition in the praxeological approach as a body-bound, implicit body knowledge that refers to incorporation and reproduction processes of an execution of action located in practice. A comprehensive and complex approach based on this is the sociological approach to movement that has been gaining in importance since the beginning of the 2000s. Gabriele Klein and Inge Baxmann did pioneer work with regard to providing a  The starting point for the development of a new understanding of movement are the 1920/30s. Important representatives of this line of development along different movement concepts are: starting with Elsa Gindler and Heinrich Jacoby in the 1920s with their understanding of movement as ‘somatic body work/sensory awareness’ developed from gymnastics, the development of Eutony in the 1930s, also in the 1920s and 1930s Rudolf von Laban and the places Dresden Hellerau and Monte Verita closely connected to him, as well as Irmgard Bartieneff (Bartieneff-Fundamentals), furthermore Kurt Jooss and Sigurd Leeder in these same years; this was followed by a break during the Nazi regime and the emigration of many protagonists; the work was taken up again by Martha Graham, José Limon and Doris Humphrey, but also in the development of the Alexander Technique and Ideokinesis as well as Feldenkrais in the 1940/50s; it was eventually continued by Merce Cunningham in the 1950s; in Germany Pina Bausch worked in this tradition from the 1970s onwards as well as parallel to this numerous American practitioners, such as Susan Klein, Bonnie Bainbridge Cohen, as well the Swiss Eric Franklin; in the 1990s, the countertechnique by Jennifer Muller followed; numerous other practitioners of dance have also been active in the development of new theoretical and methodological approaches to movement and movement knowledge since the 2000s. 1

3.1  Movement as Value and Knowledge Order of the Intangible

67

foundation for movement knowledge in this context. They argue from the perspectives of dance studies and cultural sociology, with Klein combining these research approaches in a sociology of movement. In this context, movement knowledge is formulated as a new concept for the sociology of movement: movements are defined as body-bound social practices and cultures of knowledge. For understanding practices, it is considered fundamental that movements are always bound to the given socio-structural conditions. Furthermore, it is assumed that actors [can only] act by means of body-bound movements. Movement is thereby determined as a social practice. They are practice-generating, since practice in the sense of a social community or togetherness can only come into being through bodily movement. This is connected to the assumption that movements have their own knowledge that is located in practical action. This knowledge refers to the correct way of performing movement or to the knowledge regarding the practices that can be performed at all within the given socio-structural conditions. In conclusion, the moment of movement is understood as a knowledge-bound, complex, independent, and constitutive practice. The focus is thus on movement practices as part of a knowledge concept of practice. In this approach, work is done primarily on dance practices, starting from the understanding of movement specifically defined for this purpose (cf. on this in Klein, 2004, pp. 131–154).

3.1.2 Functional Modes of Movement Practices This body is something more complex than a body that dances, and more complex than a dance that is body. Many make the mistake again and again of searching for the body in dance […]. Paula Caspao in Gehm et al.: Knowledge in Motion, p. 105

Following the concepts of cultural anthropology, sociology of the body and praxeology presented above, in the approach of the sociology of movement, movement practices are understood as constitutive for social reality, as well as for the subjectively experienced constitution of the individual. Taking this further, it is assumed that movement practices within social structures take on functions of disciplining the body and thus play their part in ensuring that these same structures are reproduced in equal measure as they determine. This means that the norms, values, settings, systems of rules, etc. that apply within the given social structures are thereby conveyed into practice by means of limited spaces for movement. Such disciplinary techniques realised through movement practices encompass the realm of public order and everyday habitual movement patterns. Simple examples are sidewalks, traffic lights, and barriers, but also the habitual and accepted ways of moving and communicating in public space such as sitting, walking, talking, and postures. Both the body-mechanical abilities and the affective and sensitive possibilities of the individual actors are created. These in turn form a foundation for certain, and only resulting, possibilities of action for the actors in practice (cf. Gugutzer, 2004; Alkemeyer et  al., 2009, among others). In this perpetual circularity of the

68

3  Performative Doing as a Living Archive of Cultural Practices

simultaneous necessity of incorporating body disciplines and performing movement practices, a canonical movement repertoire of a society emerges, which reproduces the given values, norms, and structures both in the development over time and in social space. Furthermore, these forms of transmission have the function of creating the necessary familiarity and receptivity towards the same. In this way, the actors reproduce the given situation through their movement practices and limit their own future development within the reproduced values, norms, and systems of rules. Associated with this understanding of movement as a social canon of movement is the notion of social formation. It is already a general consensus that what are considered habitual movement practices are not naturally given, but socially shaped. This includes the previously described constitution of social reality through the practices of the body. This canon of habitual forms of movement varies accordingly across cultures, societies, or groups. Taking this further, it is then interesting to see which forms of movement are legitimised in this canon and which are excluded. In addition, movement, especially dance as a practice of movement, is understood in everyday life and especially in art as a medium of expression, as an area of experience, and as a representation of the zeitgeist and criticism of the times. Thus, dance has always been understood as ‘the physical expression of social experience of time’ and, in this understanding, as a representation of the zeitgeist2 (cf. on this in Gehm et al., 2007, p. 27/28). Closely connected to this is another mode of functioning that understands movement practices as critical potential. Movement, or in this concrete example dance practices, contain a critical potential in the sense of a ‘free associative space’ within given structures and as a ‘reflexive practice of rupture and disruption of structural relations’, as formulated by Lepecki for the current state of artistic dance development at the beginning of the twenty-first century (More detailed in Lepecki, 2006, p. 23ff; Brandstetter & Wulf, 2007, p. 97ff; Gehm et al., 2007, p. 47ff). These potential functions of dance practice will be discussed in more detail in the following fourth chapter. Klein emphasises the importance of the outlined findings for the entire field of research and calls for a paradigm shift. In her argumentation, she establishes movement as a unit of analysis. In doing so, she interprets the process-like character of movement as ‘a thinking of its own kind’. The moment of movement itself is understood as a knowledge-bound, complex, independent, and constitutive practice (cf. Klein, 2004, p. 132/133). Movement practices thus find a new appreciation within the definition of knowledge generation and knowledge transmission as an extended conceptualisation of thinking. According to this, corporeality or rather movement have an equally important function as rational thinking: within the options of thinking, rational thinking is considered to be equal to the body’s own intelligence of  Examples of this are the intoxicating experience of speed and overcoming space through technical innovations (such as the railway and the steamroller) in the waltz; the dissolution of couples in wild dances as a celebration of the push for individualisation and the emancipation of women; the narcissist of the staged society such as John Travolta in ‘Saturday Night Fever’; the techno-ravers in their hour-long transgression of body boundaries (Gehm et al., 2007, p. 27/28). 2

3.2  Archiving Incorporated Knowledge

69

perception and movement as well as sensitivity and affectivity. Accordingly, movement, or dance as a concrete example, is to be ‘liberated from its opposition to thinking’ and is understood as ‘a new possibility of thinking’ (Fischer & Alarcón, 2006, p. 11). Based on these impulses for thinking, the approaches for determining movement knowledge could already lead to changes in scientific paradigms. This refers, for example, to the conceptual understanding of knowledge, to the concepts of corporeality, of space and time, to the functions of movements for social constitution and development as well as for the structural mechanisms of a social order in the sense of the praxeological perspective. Further on, new conceptualisations were determined in order to grasp these complex processes. In addition to movement knowledge, these include the concepts of performativity and materiality. Furthermore, the focus was placed on the aspects of capturing and conveying the implicit knowledge involved as well as its functionality. Connected to this are the possibilities for the way in which incorporated knowledge of cultural practices is available as knowledge to the subjective experience of the individual as well as in the social context. Within the framework of the sociological approach to movement, it is ultimately demanded that, in order to be able to do justice to future developments and to guarantee a basis for innovation for social development by means of a diversity of forms of knowledge, these must be recorded accordingly by research and communicated by means of the educational system. At this point, however, it should be questioned whether body-bound knowledge, which implies experiencing and conveying through the body, must necessarily be integrated into the epistemic system of cognitive knowledge, or whether it perhaps requires an additional step of also expanding this instance of the paradigms in the philosophy of science and in education policy.

3.2 Archiving Incorporated Knowledge This research area consequently addresses the meaning and definition of movement practices as well as the possibilities of theoretical and methodological approaches to their knowledge. Dance as a movement practice came to be a specific focus. The first attempt to capture the diverse perspectives and areas of dance is made in the introduction to the anthology Wissenskultur Tanz (Knowledge Culture Dance) (Huschka, 2009). The aim is: “to examine various forms of knowledge and to take an in-depth look at their conglomerate of considerations from conceptual theory, theatre history, movement studies, sports philosophy, dance studies, cultural studies, music studies and sociological considerations […] [as well as at the] fundus of the knowledge culture of dance and its acts of knowledge that are always at work, around its practices and discourses both material and theoretical” (ibid., p.  19). This one sentence alone illustrates the diversity that must be taken into account for the movement practice of dance alone. It became clear only in the context of the research project how strongly these efforts to record and determine dance practice are always tied to the aspects of the transmission and archivability of tacit

70

3  Performative Doing as a Living Archive of Cultural Practices

knowledge. This refers in particular to the two aspects of choosing the medium for archiving dance movements and the translatability of implicit knowledge into language. If it is now considered a given that, as has been demonstrated in the preceding sections, movement practices contain a substantial amount of tacit knowledge and at the same time perform important functions in establishing, conveying, and reproducing social values, norms, and behaviour, then the question of how to safeguard and communicate this knowledge consequently arises. Especially from the perspective of intangible cultural heritage, the various modes of safeguarding are decisive for whether and how dance practices and the associated tacit knowledge can be passed on over generations.

3.2.1 Archiving Concepts […] not in the libraries, which are always in need of expansion, but in the minds of the living. Not only in the libraries, but already in every generation should there be awareness of the old as well as the new. Assmann/Hölscher: Culture and Memory, p. 286/287

With regard to such modes of safeguarding, spatial, temporal, institutional, financial, technical, etc. possibilities would need to be established. Possibilities in the sense of an infrastructure of archivability that can be optionally used in order to record, transmit, and practice the corresponding movement practices. For a classical way of archiving using different documents and objects as media of safeguarding is obviously not sufficient to comprehensively preserve dance practice in its above-­ mentioned complexity of manifestations, meanings, and the associated knowledge and to facilitate its transmission. The concept of memory or collective memory with its various forms of safeguarding, as developed in the context of research on cultures of remembrance and which will be discussed in the following section on movement archives, proves to be helpful for thinking about such an infrastructure of archivability (e.g. Assmann, 20063; Assmann & Harth, 1993; Assmann & Hölscher, 1988). The categories of memory could be adopted for a more comprehensive approach to possibilities of archiving practices assigned to the intangible and tacit forms of knowledge, so that it seems feasible to record, preserve, and pass on cultural practices in an adequate way. For the practices of tango presented at the beginning, for example, it was the special feeling of melancholy, the dialogue or communication in or towards a social group, as well as the hybrid moment of its origin that were identified as central constitutive elements of its original practice. It was possible to identify different categories of memory in which these elements are always inherent. They correspond to different types of media: the medium of writing includes, among others, the poetics of tango, its stories, published texts, feuilletons and journals, but also personal transcripts, letters, and official documents; the medium of image contains historical and symbolic photographs, drawings and illustrations in the sense of pathos formulas, such as the portrait of Carlos Gardel, who has become a myth; the

3.2  Archiving Incorporated Knowledge

71

medium of body implies the dance movements, the practice of making music, but also the role of gender and social hierarchies; the medium of place or space is represented by local bars, designated streets, brothels, places of dance instruction and music-making, living spaces of the protagonists, especially the small backyards and narrow rooms, as well as the entire scenery of the city of Buenos Aires. It is in the constant interplay of these individual media and what the convey that the symbolically encoded bodily processes of the specific habitus tango of the individual protagonists, recognisable as tango-typical, emerge – just as much as in the interaction and performance of the various practices of tango, such as dancing, making music, composing and writing poetry, speaking and writing, dialoguing, dressing, consuming, and everyday behaviour (Kämpfe, 2018, p.  288). From the perspective of research on cultures of remembrance, these are understood as the – collective memory of tango – to be preserved. It is now the task of current research to develop concepts, approaches, and formats in order to be able to capture and safeguard this collective memory (For a compact summary of the corresponding lines of research, cf. especially Wehren, 2016). 3.2.1.1 The Concept of Archive Taking a closer look at the etymology of the term archive is useful in order to conceptually grasp the term: “The word archive goes back to the Greek word arché, which, in addition to beginning, origin and dominion, also means authority and office” (Assmann, 20063, p. 343). In this context, the classical archive and its development stand for an ordering and categorising accumulation of information or elements of memory. Thus, the archive is bound to (recording) media – in its early days writing, nowadays mainly electronic storage  – as well as to certain systems of administration and order. Such an archive allows for the preservation of selected information and media of memory. This is achieved through practices of preservation and selection. While at the beginning of the archive it was still sufficient that information or memory elements were collected and preserved in it, it became necessary to select material worthy of archiving as the amount of archivable material increased. In order to implement these two modes of functioning of the archive – the concrete spatial and material safekeeping as well as the selection of what is worth preserving  – there is a need for (mostly institutional) organisations that, on the one hand, have the knowledge of how archival work functions and, on the other hand, are authorised to carry it out. Such institutions can be so powerful that –this can, for example, be observed in totalitarian states or in strongly media-driven societies – a ‘monopoly over the past’ is created through control and strict canonisation (cf. Ebeling & Günzel, 2009, p. 171). These functions are closely related to the given interests in the respective social situation or constellation. The resulting archival work concerns itself especially with the constant legitimisation of these interests and the establishment of claims for their enforcement and justification. Thus, the

72

3  Performative Doing as a Living Archive of Cultural Practices

choice between preserving or excluding elements of memory, which seems to be permanently justified in archival work, is assigned to strict categories corresponding to the given interests. Consequently, the archive is “not a depository of data disconnected from social life, but a repressive instrument that restricts the scope of thought and articulation” (Assmann, 20063, p. 346). The monopolisation and dependence on interests that can be inferred can be observed in archives in practice. For example, the selection of holdings in university libraries is subject to epistemic as well as budgetary, personal, and ethical guidelines, which are at the same time conditioned by the given political circumstances. Similarly, the selection of the contents of the Performative Dance Archive presented in the concluding chapter can be attributed to infrastructural as well as epistemic and contextual criteria. In both cases, analyses that use a critical approach to ideology could reveal the corresponding value-based, implicit operational structures and monopolies of power. In addition, the research discourse on cultures of remembrance includes a concept of archive that is also gaining in importance for other subject areas and is broad in scope. By being described as a comprehensive collective repository of knowledge, it fulfils concrete functions on various social levels. What these are depends on whether this repository of knowledge is “organised more as an instrument of domination or as an outsourced repository of knowledge” (Assmann, 20063, p. 345). The function as an instrument of domination has been described above. The outsourced knowledge repository, on the other hand, means an archive as a functional instance in the sense of a cultural memory: the archive holds elements of knowledge that have no relevance or legitimacy in the current state of a society. However, this entails, that elements archived over the course of time cannot be implemented ad hoc in the present, unless the corresponding categories of perception and interpretation are transmitted (quoted from Ebeling & Günzel, 2009, p. 110/111). This ultimately means that archival elements that no one knows what to do with or how to deal with anymore become meaningless, as their practical or aesthetic meaning and value remain inaccessible. Both aspects are crucial when it comes to designing archives of movement. The archive as an instrument of domination decides what is ultimately considered an element worth preserving within a social constellation and thus becomes part of a canon that is legitimised in this sense. The archive as a repository of knowledge, on the other hand, can ideally open up a space of possibility outside of this institutionally regulated canon of selected elements of memory in order to record and grant access to the multiplicity and complexity of cultural practices, associated knowledge and skills, implicit values and symbols without assigning values. 3.2.1.2 Archives of Movement The concept of cultural memory offers useful starting points for working out the requirements and possibilities of such archiving work for dance practices, especially for designing such an archive in the sense of a lived or living cultural heritage. These starting points include the processual character of memory formation and, in terms of content and modes of functioning, the dependency on its media. Another

3.2  Archiving Incorporated Knowledge

73

fundamental assumption is that memory knowledge is distributed across all individuals and institutions of the social order. It may differ depending on the respective social order and the concrete memory elements, but it corresponds to a common order in the sense of common structures of values and meanings (cf. Assmann, 20063; Welzer, 2001; Assmann & Harth, 1993; Nora, 1990; Wehren, 2016). For the conception of an archive in the understanding of a cultural memory, it can then be worked with the fact that individuals and cultures generate their individual or collective memory through communication and interaction in language, images, and ritual or everyday repetitive practices (e.g., Assmann & Hölscher, 1988). Approaches to and arguments for concepts of archives for movement or dance assume that only the diversity of such repetitive practices and the body mechanisms and forms of movement associated with them enable a lively, dynamic development of social conditions. This also applies to the development of the personality and potentials of individuals. When it comes to the adequate archiving of dance practices, it is then important to ask in what way (processes and media; instances; forms) this implicit knowledge is incorporated and conveyed. Special attention must be paid to the fact that there is no comprehensive (material) repository for these forms of knowledge. Thus, it is first necessary to determine meaningful storage media for an archive of movement (e.g., Baxmann & Cramer, 2005; Gehm et  al., 2007; Klein, 2004; Wehren, 2016). The recourse to the above-mentioned broad concept of archive as well as the differentiation of the possible forms of media for the various possible movement practices lead back to the actual search for archiving modes of performative and, in particular, dance practices. The various forms of media to which the elements of memory are bound in the processes of safeguarding and transmission condition not only the fundamental ideological or functional order of the archive, but also its structuring and modes of transmission. These include written documents, narratives and myths, archives and collections, traditions, places of memory, monuments, bodies, and practices corresponding to the named media (cf. Baxmann & Cramer, 2005, p. 24). If one compares these forms of media with the defining formulations from the UNESCO Convention on the Safeguarding of the Intangible Cultural Heritage, it is striking that a large part of the provisions of intangible cultural heritage correspond to these media. The close conceptual connection between the provisions for an intangible cultural heritage and the implications for a living cultural collective memory is evident in this. For the further argumentation in relation to dance practices, based on the paradigm of the body-boundness of performative practices, it will be assumed that the body serves as a storage medium. The paradigm states (with recourse to the explanations in Sect. 1.1.2 Cultural forms of expression as well as Sect. 2.2 Dance practices) that the acting of the individual is understood as a body-bound, knowing movement of this actor. It occurs intuitively through embodied knowledge, i.e., by means of corporeality and without recourse to cognitive or rational performance. Movement is based on such incorporation processes. Last but not least, reference should be made to the statement on the part of the sociology of the body that any access to knowledge “[would] have to take into account those dimensions grounded in biology that remind us that we exist as corporeal beings” (quoted from Jeggle in Gugutzer, 2004, p. 36/37).

74

3  Performative Doing as a Living Archive of Cultural Practices

Hence, based on Mauss’ research results and concepts, the body can be thought of as a place of memory. Based on his field research, he developed a distinctive archive of bodily techniques for a particular cultural area. In addition to the factual epistemological value of body-bound practices and the corresponding knowledge, this archive points to a paradigmatic new approach: “The archive of bodily techniques, as Mauss had it in mind, was intended to recover, document, store, and preserve those experiences that had hitherto mostly not been regarded as truly ‘worth preserving’ in the European cultural tradition” (Baxmann & Cramer, 2005, p. 20). Mauss was thus a pioneer in the (re)definition of a concept of movement and in the thinking about an archive of movement. Based on the paradigm of corporeality that developed from this, it subsequently became necessary to include further markers of performative practices in the conception of movement archives, with a focus on dance practices. In addition to the aforementioned corporeality and body-­ boundness, the qualitative-constitutive aspects of movement space as well as the sensitive and affective are named as significant categories of human movement (cf. on this in Baxmann & Cramer, 2005; Wulf, 2006; Franke in Bockrath et al., 2008; Wehren, 2016 as well as in more detail in Sect. 2.2 Dance practices). Movement spaces correspond to a real physical space that is to be located outside of one’s own corporeality. Movements have the function of creating such a movement space in a complex connection with the surrounding space. Thus, movement space stands for the totality of the relationships between any kind of movement in a spatial structure. Movements are then understood as forms of dealing with these and at the same time as expressive behaviour. This relativistic view of the constitution of space understands it as a dialectical relationship between actor, space, and movement. In conclusion, the conception of space as well as the understanding of spatiality within the concept of an archive are of structuring and constitutive importance. Furthermore, an adequate concept of an archive should take into account that movement practices not only generate and mutually condition human actions, but are also involved in processes of perception, thought and feeling by both influencing and being influenced by them. Such a concept of knowledge that is based on the sensory perception of the world is already outlined by Gehlen. Movement corresponds to the “principle out of which humans make themselves cognisant, this happens on a level below cognitive thinking.” This sensory cognition is based on a “whole apparatus of seeing, touching, processing sensory impressions, the imagination, which in a kind of ‘response behaviour’ produces the things of the world of the person acting” (Gebauer & Wulf, 1998, p. 33). Thus, these two levels of spatiality and sensory perceptions should both be equally central categories of media in a conception of an archive.

3.2.2 Notation Systems for Dance Movements Why has culture not produced a suitable script for movement, a means to think movement, to develop it, when we have a musical notation for music? Do we not also have a body, not just a voice? Noa Eshkol in Gehm et al.: Knowledge in Motion, p. 37

3.2  Archiving Incorporated Knowledge

75

In accordance with the particularities of movement practices outlined so far, the function of an archive for movement would have to be dedicated, in addition to the classical archiving methods, above all to the safeguarding and communication of the incorporated and implicit knowledge. Even the traditional media associated with archiving, such as historical and contemporary documents and collected elements and objects, always contain implicit values and knowledge. This becomes particularly evident when looking at dance scripts and notation systems that correspond to different dance styles. If at first they seem to be mere transcriptions and representations of choreographic works in dance, it quickly becomes clear when studying them, especially in the attempt of reconstructing the choreographies written down, that without insights into the associated movement vocabulary, into the specific movement aesthetics of the choreographic period, without the knowledge about the applied techniques of tension and posture, the use of space, the dynamic and musical framing, and not least about the intention underlying the choreographic work in relation to the dance movement or the choreographic work, there is no point in preserving the documents apart from their historical value (cf. Gehm et al., 2007, pp.  171–230; Brandstetter & Klein, 2015, pp.  123–194; Quinten & Schroedter, 2016, pp. 73–86, among others). In dance practice and in choreographic processes, notations are necessary and desirable because of these many layers of meaning. Already Rudolf von Laban called for: “A literature of dance […], written down in movement signs, is as necessary and desirable as the historical records of poetry in the written word, of music in musical notation” (Laban, 2003, p. 31). If one resorts to handed-down notations in dance practice, the handing down of dances can even be considered a form of participation and active interpretation (according to Reddeker in Diehl & Lampert, 2011, p. 26). Furthermore, dance scripts play a major role in research on dance history: “Since dance scripts have always adapted to the changing conditions caused by dance development, they inform about the dance of a specific time” (Jeschke, 1983, p. 18). When dance is examined from an academic perspective, as has been demonstrated in the previous chapters, it is mostly about concepts such as reconstruction work, forms of transmission and implicit knowledge. These concepts are primarily related to documenting dance and making it accessible as a source of knowledge as well as preserving it. Due to this relevance of notation systems for dance heritage, the aspect of dance notation will be discussed briefly. The primary purpose of using dance notations is to represent movements of all kinds in symbolic form, comparable to notes in music. The aim is to describe elements of movement of the human body using standardised categories and terminology as well as to capture underlying structures such as rhythm, dynamics, impulses and intensities in the process (cf. Jeschke, 1983, pp.  46–57). Whereas from the sixteenth century onwards, beginning with the court dances, it was mainly social dances that were notated, by the beginning of the twentieth century entire choreographies were written down. However, unlike in music, a comparable, binding system of notation has never been able to establish itself. Thus, various notation systems are still used today. In addition to historical dance notation, there are three systems of importance today: Labanotation or kinetography, Benesh Movement Notation or

76

3  Performative Doing as a Living Archive of Cultural Practices

Choreology, and, less frequently, Eshkol-Wachmann Movement Notation (cf. Jeschke, 1983, pp. 136–165, as well as on the connection between choreography and notation Klein, 20192, pp.  21–27). Technology-supported visualisation techniques are creating new possibilities for the visual and digital representation of movement, which are especially useful when integrated with the traditional movement analysis of dance notation. In everyday dance practice, it is mostly contemporary choreographers who now work primarily with the recording of dances as moving images. In the field of dance technology, the focus is on the development of editors for the creation, editing and printing of notation scores, their adaptation for computer animation as well as the automated recording of dance movements, such as in motion capturing (cf. various contributions on dance notation and technologies in Klein & Zipprich, 2002, pp. 477–534 as well as Klein, 20192, pp. 28–41). There will be a brief discussion of each of the forms of notation mentioned, as they can illustrate the search for and further development of notating, passing on and recapitulating dance movement and other dance situations. 3.2.2.1 Notation of Courtly Dances The need to write down dances and choreographies has apparently already existed for several centuries, in order to be able to fall back on this defined, manifest form of a dance instruction at any time, as well as to reassure oneself in it. Courtly dances are regarded as the first dance form of the developing European dance modernism. They also represent the beginnings of dance notation. As courtly dances became more popular from the fourteenth century onwards, the need to document the steps in writing increased in order to ensure their correct execution (cf. in Klein, 20192, pp.  21–27). In the fifteenth century, Antonio Cornazzano and Guglielmo Ebreo (Italian dance masters and dance theorists) attempted to describe the basses danses of the time in treatises. In the sixteenth century, Thoinot Arbeau was the first to compile a compendium of ballroom dances, his descriptive and explanatory L’Orchésographie was published in 1589 and is still received today. He spent most of his life as a member of the clergy at the Langres Cathedral. As the author of several texts and observations on the dances of his time, he achieved special renown. After several attempts in the seventeenth century, the time of absolutist court dances during the reign of the French king Louis XIV, the Chorégraphie, published in 1700, summarised the dance knowledge of the baroque period. It was published by Raoul-­ Auger Feuillet, who worked as a dancer, dance master, choreographer and notator at the Versailles court. In collaboration with Pierre Beauchamp, who also worked at the Versailles Court as a musician, composer, dancer and choreographer, a dance notation was developed for the first time. The Feuillet-Beauchamp notation is still used today for the reconstruction of so-called Early Dances (cf. in Jeschke, 1983, p. 110/111, pp. 203–207). The illustration (Fig. 3.1) shows the first image of the Bourée d’Achille, a very popular court dance of the Baroque period, in Feuillet-Beauchamp notation. For those familiar with the notation, it illustrates in a vertical reading direction on its

3.2  Archiving Incorporated Knowledge

77

Fig. 3.1  Feuillet-Beauchamp notation the first image of the Bourée d’Achille. (Source: https:// earlydance.org/content/6415-­la-­bourree-­dachilles (last access: 27.01.2021))

left side the movements of the gentleman and on the right side those of the lady over a period of eight bars. In addition to the direction of movement and the pattern to be danced, the footwork in its variety of steps, jumps, turns and pirouettes can be read from a breakdown of each individual movement and position of the foot. In this picture, for example, the gentleman is dancing: a pas de bourrée (two high steps and one low, bobbing step), which begins with the right foot. In the balancé on the left in bar six, for example, there is a kind of waltz step, beginning with a little jump onto a bent leg with the left foot (double strokes). In addition, indications such as a turn around the left shoulder (direction of the checkmark)are given in bar seven.

78

3  Performative Doing as a Living Archive of Cultural Practices

3.2.2.2 Dance Notation Ballet/Concert Dance The renowned ballet reformer Jean-Georges Noverre condemned dance notation, arguing that it had to be deciphered and that unlike with texts and musical scores, spontaneous sight-reading was not possible. In his opinion, important, valued choreographies could spread and remain in the repertoire by means of dancing and the collective memory, even without writing them down (See in Klein, 20192, p. 25/26). However, this kind of repertoire work became more problematic with the development of concert dance, which started to develop out of social dance in the eighteenth century. This equally affected the notation of complex choreographic works for dance ensembles. The more varied the movements and the more complex the work with space became, the more difficult it was to find a practicable system for recording them (cf. Jeschke, 1983, p. 112). In the nineteenth century, Arthur Saint-Léon, a musician, dancer, choreographer, and dance theorist, developed a dance notation that ran parallel to musical notation (Fig. 3.2). It was published as Sténochorégraphie around 1852. This approach was further developed by Friedrich Albert Zorn, who, like Saint-Léon, worked as a dancer, choreographer, and dance theorist throughout Europe, in his Grammar of the Art of Dance published in 1887. For each recorded dance it contains a compendium of movement sequences set parallel to the musical notation, compact drawings of floor patterns and detailed descriptions of the performing body parts (cf. Jeschke, 1983, p. 112/113, pp. 229–231). 3.2.2.3 Benesh Movement Notation/Choreology From this preliminary work, the Benesh Movement Notation, known as choreology, was eventually developed. It was the first notation that allowed for ballets to be recorded in writing. It was developed by the Czech painter and musician Rudolf Benesh and his wife Joan Benesh at the end of the 1940s in England. The notation was patented in 1955. Since the term choreography was already used at that time as a synonym for the definition of movements, Benesh chose the term choreology instead. The notation is based on the system of staves and bar lines known from music. The lines correspond from top to bottom to the dancer’s head, shoulders, hips, knees, and feet, into which the dimensions and quality of the dance movements are drawn by means of abstract symbols. This type of notation has the advantage that it can be combined with a musical score to illustrate the synchronisation of music and dance (cf. Jeschke, 1983, pp.  279–283 as well as online https://www.royalacademyofdance.org/study/Benesh/the-­benesh-­institute-­and-­ benesh-­movement-­notation). The following example shows how a movement is recorded in this notation system. Choreology is maintained by the Benesh Institute, which merged with the Royal Academy of Dance in London in 1997 (Fig. 3.3).

3.2  Archiving Incorporated Knowledge

79

Fig. 3.2  Sténochorégraphie. (Source: https://www.ausstellungen.deutsche-­digitale-­bibliothek.de/ tanz/exhibits/show/das-­gedaechtnis-­des-­tanzes/tanzschreibekunst (last accessed: 27.01.2021))

3.2.2.4 Eshkol-Wachmann Movement Notation The somewhat less frequently used Eshkol-Wachmann Movement Notation was developed in Israel in the 1950s by the dancer Noa Eshkol and the architect Abram Wachmann. It is not based on a particular movement style in its approach to analysis. Movement notation is done on a three-dimensional geometric basis as purely abstract, spatial, and temporal parameters of movement. It makes do with a small number of categories for the analysis of movement, since only the spatial progressions of the different skeletal sections of the body are described. This makes the system useful in a wide variety of areas, even outside of dance (cf. Jeschke, 1983, pp. 421–426). The following notation picture (Fig. 3.4) shows a bar of a movement phrase for the whole body.

80

3  Performative Doing as a Living Archive of Cultural Practices

Fig. 3.3  Choreology. (Source: https://www.royalacademyofdance.org/study/Benesh/the-­benesh-­ institute-­and-­benesh-­movement-­notation (last accessed: 27.01.2021))

Fig. 3.4  Eshkol-Wachmann Movement Notation: first page of the score of ‘Angels and Angels’ by Noa Eshkol 1989. (Source: https://www.noaeshkol.org/gallery/angles-and-angels/ (last access: 27.01.2021))

3.2.2.5 Labanotation/Kinetography One of the most famous and ultimately the most complex notation system was developed by Rudolf von Laban (1879–1958). He was both the central figure of European modern dance and one of the most important dance theorists. He published it in 1928 as Kinetography. The system is based on his theoretical work, in which he dealt with the function of movement and thus created a foundation for the development of modern dance. He described, classified, and notated movements and thus developed the dance notation of kinetography (cf. in Laban: Schrift-Tanz, Vienna 1928 and ders.: Kinetographie, Wilhelmshafen 1955). The Laban Movement Analysis was subsequently developed on this basis. It allows, among other things, to systematically observe and interpret body movements. The method is presented in the concluding chapter as a tool of the Performative Dance Archive. Compared to the dance notations of court dances and classical ballet, Labanotation can be described as an even more detailed notation of dance movements. It is based on the

3.2  Archiving Incorporated Knowledge

81

300-years-old systems of the choreographers Beauchamps and Feuillet and depicts movements by means of graphic symbols. The notation or the notation key was developed based on the natural human movement. Every change in the movement is notated. The basis is a spatial analysis of movement, which is characterised by a certain image of movement of the human body coined by Laban. Labanotation can be used to record any form of human movement. It is widely used to document and record the choreographic repertoire of different styles (cf. Kennedy/Weber in Fleischle-Braun et  al., 2017, pp.  169–196 as well as Kennedy in Brandstetter & Klein, 2015, pp. 65–82). For example, a simplified kinetogram may look like the following (in a complete kinetogram almost all movements and positioning of any body parts are defined): The short choreography shown in Fig. 3.5 can be read from top to bottom and has a total time span of 22 bars. These are represented by the short strokes on the centreline. Each stroke represents four bars. While the part to the right of the centreline symbolises the right half of the body, the left side documents the movements of the left half of the body. This is indicated by the long lines on the left and right sides. Each symbol within the diagram carries its own meaning. The horizontal double line at the very bottom shows the beginning of the sequence of movements. At the same time, there is first a step with the right foot, then a step with the left – indicated by the two lines close to the centreline. In the next four bars, a small jump is marked Fig. 3.5  Kinetogram of labanotation. (Source: Quinten & Schroedter, 2016, p. 78)

82

3  Performative Doing as a Living Archive of Cultural Practices

between bars two and three, indicated by the short lines. This is followed by a movement of the spine with the simultaneous movement of the left leg. The lines outside the diagram represent the spine and the line inside the diagram represents the left leg. Now the whole body comes into its starting position, as the kinetogram is split by two lines. This indicates the transition from one movement to the next. In bars one to four and nine to twelve, the right leg makes a movement. In bars five to eight it stays in the initial movement. At the beginning, there is an activation of both hands, represented by the two oblique E’s. Within the indicated bars, they grasp, this is symbolised by the x’s. Until the end of the entire movement, the two hands remain in this position. In addition, from bar five onwards, an action of the left arm is required. The two lines at the end of the diagram signal the end of the choreography (cf. Quinten/Schroedter, p. 77/78 as well as in Laban, 1955, pp. 7–31). The notation developed by Laban was further developed by Ann Hutchinson Guest into Labanotation and by Albrecht Knust into Laban Kinetography. The two systems differ somewhat from each other. To this day they are part of the dance curriculum of art schools, such as the Folkwang University in Essen. There, Laban kinetography is taught at the Institute for Contemporary Dance as a compulsory subject in formal dance training in order to provide a sound foundation for the analysis of movement (Brinkmann in Fleischle-Braun et al., 2017, pp. 209–230). With reference to his project Starting Point on dance notation at Folkwang University Henner Drewes stated: “[Labanotation] simultaneously provides an analysis and also the possibility to develop different approaches to the movement” (quoted from Drewes in Piechaczek & Brinkmann, 2016: Etude und Variationen, online: www. folkwang-­uni.de/de/home/hochschule/projekte-­labs/vollanzeige/?projektid=692, min. 04:28). Therefore, it is never possible to reconstruct a dance one hundred percent true to the original through kinetography. This fact, however, makes the transmission of dance all the more interesting. As Drewes explains about Labanotation: “[…] it [is] not just a means of documentation, but it also offers the possibility of entering into creative processes, creating variations or it can also be a means of composition” (ibid., min. 04:43). This once again highlights the relevance of notation systems to a living heritage of dance practices. It calls not only for the safeguarding of and access to these notation systems, but primarily for the abilities of dancers to learn how to use and work with them. 3.2.2.6 Recording Through New Media Having arrived in the age of new media, dance notation also uses the possibilities offered by these media. As Drewes already emphasises in the context of his project at Folkwang University: “New analytical and creative potentials arise through new technology-supported visualisation techniques” (quoted from Drewes in Piechaczek, Christian and Brinkmann, Stephan (2016): Etude and Variations. Available online: www.folkwang-­uni.de/de/home/hochschule/projekte-­labs/vollanzeige/?projektid= 692, min. 03:26, last accessed: 14.11.2017). Video recordings in particular allow for a new way of recording and archiving dances or choreographic works. Thus, it

3.2  Archiving Incorporated Knowledge

83

Fig. 3.6  Motion capture. (Source: https://www.optitrack.com/products/motive/body/indepth.html (last accessed: 27.01.2021))

appears easier to record, reconstruct, learn, and pass on movement sequences. It should nevertheless be noted that, on the one hand, video recordings can convey a relatively accurate impression of a dance, but due to the limited perspective and two-dimensionality of the recording, only experienced dancers learn new movements from dance videos. It is above all good and useful for remembering movement sequences. An even more accurate recording of movements, especially fine motor movements, can be generated by the tracking method Motion Capture. Modern software makes it possible to capture dance steps and convert them into 3D models on the computer (Fig. 3.6). It makes it possible to capture any kind of movement and convert it into a format that can be read by computers so that they can analyse, record, process, and use the movements to control applications (cf. various contributions on dance notation and technologies in Klein & Zipprich, 2002, pp.  477–534). An example of such an application is the transfer of human movements to computer-­ generated 3D models. Merce Cunningham is the pioneer of this kind of notation, but above all its use for creative choreographic work and further development of his dance technique. A very good insight into his work with this technique can be found in the online documentary by Sunday Arts (2009): Merce Cunningham at 90, online: https://www.youtube.com /watch?v = 2hLljFBQBN0. Beginning with courtly dance and continuing with ballet and contemporary dance forms, one can understand what Jeschke noted in her book Tanzschriften (Dance Scripts): the notation is dependent on “a commonly shared understanding of dance that is specific to the time” (Jeschke, 1983, p. 32). Understanding the dance notations therefore requires some basic knowledge of the specific dance forms. Both courtly dance and ballet have various terms that are used for individual movements and can be learned like a kind of vocabulary. This is what makes a decoding

84

3  Performative Doing as a Living Archive of Cultural Practices

of the dance notations actually feasible. The precision of the new notation systems may allow for a new paradigm of dance archives to be developed. If the changes to the previous dance notations over the course of time and the prerequisite of a detailed knowledge of the dance notation made the exact reconstruction of a dance virtually impossible, the newer methods seem to make this more feasible. It remains to be seen from the perspective of dance practice to what extent this vision of a detailed possibility for reconstruction can actually be realised.

3.2.3 Dance Literacy The body is an updated historical formation into which one dances in order to follow the traces of its history, its stories and the emotions associated with them. Gerald Siegmund in Baxmann/Cramer: Deutungsräume, p. 173

The concept of dance literacy has been able to develop as a result of this widespread consensus on the cross-stylistic use in dance practice and on the necessary range of different ways of notation and recording. It places the various approaches to the perception, recording, and communication of dance processes in a conceptual and methodological framework (cf. Mersch in Brandstetter & Klein, 2015, pp. 317–338 as well as Eger in Hardt & Stern, 2011, pp. 161–184). The term originates from Anglo-American dance studies and is used there especially in connection with Labanotation. It refers to the ability to decipher and implement dance notation and to notate movements and choreographies. With the adoption of the term in the German-speaking context of dance studies, this definition has expanded. It now encompasses more differentiated and far-reaching competencies. These can be grouped into three categories: (ibid.) • the knowledge and application of the special dance vocabulary, its terminologies, and corresponding notations; • the dance experience in practice; • contextual knowledge of dance styles, works and artists for analysis, critical reflection, and exchange about dance works. This detailed description of the term dance literacy becomes more comprehensible when compared to the categories of language use. Thus, the aspects of the first competence correspond to the reading, writing, and understanding of texts: the writing down of dance sequences, the reading of dance notations as well as the ability to speak and write about dance with the corresponding dance vocabulary. The use of grammar is found in the second competence: the use of space, time, dynamics, form, movement material, and their interconnections. The use of language can then be paralleled with the choreographic tools, the understanding and translation of dance-specific terms into movements, and the comparing and contrasting of dance movements. Contextual knowledge in language use and knowledge of literature correspond to the third competence, which comprises knowledge of dance repertoire, dancers, choreographers, and the personal, social, and historical meanings of dance

3.2  Archiving Incorporated Knowledge

85

(cf. Eger in Hardt & Stern, 2011, p. 194/195). If one anticipates the determination of dance knowledge of the three levels that are to be differentiated in the fourth chapter, these can equally be assigned to the three competence areas of dance literacy. Thus, knowledge of the historical-stylistic development of dance and the specificity of dance forms in describing and understanding them through analytical methods corresponds to the first competence of knowledge of the specific terminologies and dance vocabulary. The circulating discursive knowledge of dance around structural conditions conforms to the third competence of contextual knowledge. The knowledge of dance practices, accessible through bodily or also body-­ mechanical, sensory, and emotional experience, corresponds to the second competence of dance practice. 3.2.3.1 Dance Literacy as a Research Approach Thus, the approach to dance literacy could be a suitable stepping stone for the further development of terminological, conceptual and methodological tools within the existing discourse of dance studies in the German-speaking context. The previously presented aspects from the discourses in dance studies and sociology of movement with regard to dance knowledge or, in a broader sense, dance heritage – perceiving, recording and implementing or communicating – can be meaningfully integrated into this conceptual approach. Furthermore, the competences, practices, and areas of knowledge named in the context of dance literacy are connected to the various media found in dance practice. These correspond to the aforementioned media used in the current practice of dance studies: books and academic publications, notations and dance scripts, various forms of documents and transcripts, visual documents and video recordings, rehearsals and performances, as well as conversations, memories, and transmission and teaching activities. With regard to the media used, it should also be taken into account that notations and forms of documentation have changed in the course of the development of dance. The range of methodological approaches to these modes of recording has expanded accordingly. As a result, the perspectives of the approaches in the concept of dance literacy have become more diverse (cf. Bischof & Rosiny, 2010; Klein & Zipprich, 2002). Starting with anthropological approaches, anthropological dimensions of dance, its primarily ritual performativity, representation, and body techniques are addressed. Theoretical approaches to education include educational concepts and dance pedagogy. Approaches from cultural sociology and political perspectives focus on the performance of the social dimension and the relationship between the social order and dance practice, as well as on the infrastructures for dance, their institutionalisation, and dance as politics or dance as criticism. Approaches from cultural psychology, on the other hand, focus on the aspects of identity, body history, and interpersonal action. Aesthetic approaches highlight body techniques and forms of movement, spatial concepts and the perception of temporality as well as the mediality of dance. These different perspectives provide both theoretical lines of inquiry through the analysis of texts, discourses and

86

3  Performative Doing as a Living Archive of Cultural Practices

structures, as well as more recent practice-oriented approaches using recordings and medialities from actual dance practice. The empiricism of these approaches is based on body movement as well as its documentation, reconstruction and processing in media, iconography, literature, film, video recordings, and photographs. Within dance research, the different forms of knowledge from dance movement, image, music, and writing are thus combined. In this way, research proves to be both a product of knowledge and a production of knowledge. Based on the extensive range of competences of dance literacy and the diverse theoretical and methodological approaches, it should be noted with regard to the use of terminology that the approach must be as sensitive and critical as possible. For the naming of dance forms, characteristics and knowledge is at the same time a definition, which in turn includes a valuation – of whatever kind. Although unintentionally, the naming party positions itself in the traditional thought patterns of high culture/low culture, which are themselves reflected in terms such as municipal theatre scene, independent dance scene, street art, etc. But above all, structural levels of hierarchy are always involved: the possibilities of actually practising a form of dance, its status of documentation, and the value assigned to it by social discourse, the position of the researchers themselves, as well as the surrounding context in the form of the so-called zeitgeist. Both the theoretical and methodological interconnectedness as well as the sensitive interaction of structural and terminological aspects become clear in the analytical approaches to the media formats of video and photography that will be outlined in the following section. 3.2.3.2 Dance Literacy as a Framework of Analysis for Video Recordings and Photographic Material In her analysis of the dance practice of tango (Haller: Abstimmung in Bewegung 2014), Haller designs the methodological approach of videography. Her underlying assumption is that movement materialises in a temporary way through corporeality. In terms of argumentation, she breaks away from prioritised understandings of social practices as text, or semiotic approaches, and turns to the parameters of images, bodies, artefacts. She examines these on three levels. First of all, she considers the preconditions and prior knowledge on a methodological level. To this end, as a kind of contextual knowledge, she first applies various perspectives from within dance studies to the dance situations and elaborates on them accordingly. She uses the historical perspective to focus on the aspects of dance, music, literature, and the political framework; she applies discourse analyses to examine the categories of gender and ethnicity; from the perspective of phenomenology, the concepts of corporeality and essence are discussed; from the perspective of cultural sociology, she uses tools from practice theory to determine concepts of movement and society. In a second preparatory methodological step, Haller selects empirical material and data. For the analysis of the empirical material she again decides on three different approaches: on the one hand, there is the descriptive level of the material, on the other hand, the discursive level of

3.2  Archiving Incorporated Knowledge

87

prior knowledge, discourses, and the like. The third level is the analysis of the concrete video material of dance situations (ibid., pp. 30–34). In the process of viewing selected dance movement material in the form of video recordings, she reflects on the necessary adaptation of video analysis to the specifics of dance movement. Furthermore, she tries to find an adequate form of translation of the analysed movement into linguistic terminology. The rationale for both reflections is that body knowledge gained from filmed movements is read in its entanglement of practices, discourses, and the technical media for transfer. From a technical point of view, for example, the sequentiality has to be taken into account for the interpretation: this means the contradiction of chronology and technical modulation, when technical options such as still images, slow motion, rewind, and repetition are used in the process of analysis of what are actually parallel sequences within the dance situations. For the concrete analysis of the video material, Haller uses qualitative methods of ethnography as well as transcription software. Unlike in discourse analysis, there are so far no standardised methods for this kind of interpretative and analytical approach. She therefore does not work in a standardised way with a hermeneutic approach to the material: the analytical work focuses on understanding the intrinsic context through a reconstruction of the interactions. The aim is not to decipher the what, but above all the how. In line with the preceding calls for a new methodology that takes praxeological premises into account, Haller’s conception thus considers structural orders as well as discourses and their contexts (ibid., pp. 35–45). In the field of photography, an anthology focusing on dance processes and images was published with analyses between aesthetic logic and medial or material context (Jahn et al.: Tanzfotografie 2016). In all approaches, the structural and processual connections between the context of creation, materiality, and image analysis are deliberately taken into account. In addition to the concrete content analysis, technical aspects of creation and editing are included, for example the influence of technical procedures on recording and perception, as well as production processes (both technical and infrastructural), and the viewer’s reception; the authorship is critically analysed as part of a source analysis in order to become aware of falsifications or distortions in the discourse; the (discursive) images of the photographs are traced by revealing the nature and difficulties of the research process, by working out the image- and discourse-analytical contextualisation, as well as by making the plurality of a photograph’s layers visible: these include aspects of reproduction such as image series and duplicates, the traceable layers of analysis, as well as the abstract overall image of a photograph, which address aspects such as image, myth and reality. There are also phenomenological questions about the temporality and corporeality of photographs, references to concepts of presence and aura, and notions of reality. The focus can then move to shifts in meaning, varying views and perspectives, as well as changes in the way photographs are seen and perceived. In doing so, concepts such as moment versus movement, myth versus image work, or the positioning in relation to the so-called zeitgeist can be addressed at the same time. Furthermore, art-historical and dance-historical ways of analysing imagery continue to be available in order to explore image aesthetics, historical contexts,

88

3  Performative Doing as a Living Archive of Cultural Practices

critiques of the time, and functionalities (for example, photography as a medium of evidence and argument in medicine) (ibid.). Both approaches illustrate the complexity and interconnectedness of the knowledge in dance practice and possible approaches to it. With recourse to the conceptual approach of dance literacy, it may be possible to do justice to this complexity and to perceive and grasp dance practice in a differentiated way from the three perspectives of relevant knowledge. Taking all this into account – the media used for notation and recording, the methodical approaches to the recording and archiving of movement and dance practice – then the approach of a living heritage of dance demands that we consider the specificity of forms of dance: in order to adequately preserve and pass on dance practices, the forms of archiving them must at the same time include practices of their creation, their perception and the practice of concrete performance. Moreover, those currently active should always be aware that the present decides what is to be remembered and how it is to be shaped, interpreted, and communicated. Thus, research has the task of constituting the heritage of dance by naming, remembering, practicing, and communicating it. Ideally, the concept of archives of movement should also focus on the aspect of preserving and communicating the differentiation and diversity of movement styles. Such a concept for an archive of movement would be a concept of a living archive: performative and media-transmitted. This means that the main media of such archival work are first and foremost the body acting in the dance practice, the place or space of dance situations as well as the presence of the actors involved. The focus lies on the action of dancing itself which forms the starting point for the process of cognition and transmission. The Performative Dance Archive, a theoretical concept developed from this approach and tested in practice, is presented in the concluding fifth chapter.

3.3 On the Value of Dance Heritage in the Present: Modern Expressive Forms and Contemporary Ways of Working As always, the new style does not begin with the highly skilled, but with the highly perceptive; as always, it looks backwards at the old, at the past, in order to find form and certainty for the way out of the past and into the future. Curt Sachs, quoted from Fleischle-Braun et al. (2017), p. 61

The importance of this insistent demand for a living dance heritage can be illustrated by the example of Modern Expressive Dance. After all, it is still necessary to justify, both in terms of the public and political discourse and within expert academic circles, why we should concern ourselves at the present time with the manifestations and systems of movement of its dance heritage. As was demonstrated in Sect. 1.2.2 on the transmission and further development of dance heritage in the present, the various dance styles, and traditions of transmission of the rhythmic and expressionist dance movement all have a prominent place in the practice of dance education today. This includes their concepts of dance didactics as well as the knowledge of movement imparted. Especially in basic dance education as well as in

3.3  On the Value of Dance Heritage in the Present: Modern Expressive Forms…

89

the context of artistic dance production, these are firmly anchored as a self-evident basis of dance work, which the dancers are mostly not aware of. The basis of learning, practising and (re-)creating remains to be the person-bound transmission of traditional, adapted, or self-created dance techniques and the associated knowledge of technical and habitual skills. Every dancer, no matter how autonomously he or she acts, has enjoyed some kind of dance education and has thus incorporated a pre-­ imprint of a certain knowledge and skill. At the same time, the dance heritage is always the starting point for the development of dance activity in the present. In the practice of the present dance process, the constant interaction between dance heritage and future developments begins. In this context, it can also be stated that those working in the artistic field of dance seem to correspond more and more to the image of dance style or movement all-rounders, who no longer only master concrete techniques, but are above all able to constantly adapt and readjust their processes of movement. The dancers must not only be able to engage with the different movement languages of various productions, but also (co-)create them themselves as co-authors in the context of collaborative choreographic forms of work. The type of dancer-choreographer corresponds to this required profile of a dancer (Fleischle-Braun et al., 2017, p. 49). These increasingly comprehensive requirements, the necessary skills demanded of the dancers, the options, ideas, creative inputs and searching necessities presenting themselves create a wide arrange of possibilities for processes of dance. These are both creative pools and starting points for new (re)discoveries. Transmitted techniques, approaches and traditions of the dance heritage are adopted and retraced. Detailed aspects come to light, are remembered, implemented and re-interpreted. In the contemporary process of dance, the dance heritage assumes the function of an impulse for the re-­ constructions, de-constructions and constructions of ideas for dance. In the rediscovery and appropriation of traditional techniques, creative processes and new ways of working emerge. In these processes of development, dance heritage is both lived in the present and the foundation of an ongoing creative development (Fleischle-Braun et al., 2017, p. 50). As a result, a focus on choreographic work is discernible in the current discourse caught between the sometimes conflicting priorities and needs of dance practices, living heritage, reconstruction, and transmission as well as creative processes. For choreography presents itself as a specific from of archiving of a living heritage of dance. In this function of transmission and further development as practices of safeguarding, choreographic work can be both a form of safeguarding of traditional techniques and a space for ongoing development. Both aspects can already be found in the etymological origin of the word. The term choreography has its roots in the Greek language and unites the two terms [chorós] meaning a dance floor in the sense of an enclosed performance space where dance takes place, and [graphein] in the meaning of writing or carving. In this derivation of a spatial (dance) script, choreography means, on the one hand, the ways of writing down movement sequences or recording them for the perception of fleeting moments and, on the other hand, the writing of movement with one’s own body in space. While the former means a perceiving and apprehending form of recording and conveying movement scenarios, the latter refers to the bodily, empractical, and creative work with movement (et al.

90

3  Performative Doing as a Living Archive of Cultural Practices

Klein, 20192, pp. 19–21). Both aspects of a conceptual definition of choreography offer potential forms of archiving for a living heritage of dance. This broad understanding of what choreography can mean and achieve, emerged from a conceptual shift, which in turn stands in a close dialectical relationship to choreographic practice itself: as dance and its particular modes of functioning are reflected upon and tested in new ways, the understanding of choreography in theory and practice changes. Whereas choreography, in the topographical understanding of the term, initially meant a fixed, repeatable order of movement that regulated and organised movement, but above all fixed sequences of movement, in the twentieth century an understanding of choreography as a process of distributing and ordering bodies in space and time became established. Thus, the meaning of choreography as a regimented practice or technique of moving is more and more set aside in favour of an understanding as a situational organisation of movement (ibid.). Currently, the term stands for the situational organisation of movement in space and time, which is no longer merely prescribed. This becomes clear in Tim Etchell’s constellation: OR g An IZ A Tion Of

Tim

Move me nt  I N     E And s Pace (from Klein, 20192, p. 17)

Corresponding contemporary positions on the understanding of choreography were published in an issue of the online journal CORPUS in 2007. 52 artists, scholars, curators, and critics were interviewed on the meaning of choreography. There is an astonishing diversity of what choreographic work means for protagonists involved in dance processes. For the sake of clarity and because of their concrete relevance to practice, a selection of these perspective will be cited: Artificially staged action(s) and situations [Xavier Le Roy]; Spatial writing as a writing with the body [Raimund Hoghe]; Mode of action to make a choice [Jonathan Burrows]; Assimilating and synthesising all knowledge generated by movement to produce a kind of graph for learning and testing future possibilities [Simone Aughterlony]; a space for thinking about the organisation of movement or relations between objects and subjects in time and space on stage [Jan Ritsema]; social space as a construction of a world in which we implement this organisation [Thomas Lehmen] (ibid., p. 18). The equally diverse artistic practice of choreographic work can be traced in a similar way, for example, with Merce Cunningham’s way of working and his use of digital simulation

3.3  On the Value of Dance Heritage in the Present: Modern Expressive Forms…

91

(documented in Sunday Arts (2009): Merce Cunningham at 90. Available online: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2hLljFBQBN0); with Wayne McGregor’s approach to choreography as a creative process in the dance moment itself (presented at TED Talks (2012): A Choreographer’s Creative Process in Real Time. Wayne McGregor. Online: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KPPxXeoIzRY); with Steven Butler’s way of working with choreography as a creative process emerging from the transcription of music (presented at TED Talks (2018): The Process of a Choreographer: A New Way to View Dance. Steven Butler. Online: https://www. youtube.com/watch?v=hEVQdkRtbqI). These approaches from practice clearly reflect the diversity of perspectives and approaches of modes of perception in dance studies. Research in dance studies that takes these differentiated methods of working and creative processes into account falls back on a praxeological understanding of choreography: “With regard to choreography, the concept of practice makes three things possible at once: choreography can be understood as a process (not as a product), it can be understood as the consequence and expression of an interplay between artists and the art business (not as the creation of a self-determined individual) and, finally, as an everyday practice carried out as a long-term process” (Husemann in Barthels, 2017, p. 19). This ultimately puts the broader concept of choreography by Tim Etchell cited above into words as the order of movement of human bodies and artefacts in time and space. In order to be able to grasp and use this broad concept, certain characteristics have been worked out in the discourse of dance studies. First of all, the choreographic moment is always situation-, context- and person-bound. Furthermore, it can be created by choreographic rules, but it can also arise from the situation. Depending on the context, it relates to an artistic order, thus tied to aesthetic values, or to everyday social situations. Typically, it includes the relationship between actors and audience. Finally, despite the situational conditionality, it always also refers to forms of writing, recording, documenting, and publishing choreographic orders (cf. in Barthel, 2017, pp. 27–44). This breakdown allows us to close the gap to the value of dance heritage. Choreographic work is proving to be a predestined practice for drawing on dance heritage, becoming aware of it and to creatively reinterpret it in the sense of a living heritage that is bound to a specific situation. Furthermore, choreographic practices are increasingly being discovered as an instrument of cultural education in the context of dance education. In that discourse, a dispositive of creativity has been formulated in order to develop personality formation and sociality. As a result, concepts of dance education are promoted more and more. The focus is on the recourse to choreographic practices from artistic work in order to relate them to pedagogical approaches and techniques of Modern Expressive Dance. In this way, dance transmission not only transfers competence relevant to education, but is first and foremost a practice based on experience (ibid., p. 221ff). On the other hand, there are concerns that such a use of dance heritage would be designed too much as a tool and could lead to an increasing formalisation and institutionalisation of creative dance potential in order to comply with the framework of educational policy. Due to these kinds of ambivalences, there is also a controversial discussion about the cultural heritage status of the nominated cultural heritage

92

3  Performative Doing as a Living Archive of Cultural Practices

‘Modern Dance - Styles and Ways of Imparting Rhythm and Free Dance Movement’. As has been shown, the various dance styles and traditions of transmission are still or once again of great importance, both in the practice of dance education and basic dance training as well as in the context of artistic dance production in the development of modern and contemporary choreographies for dance theatre. This is contrasted with the further developments and transformations, hybrids and variations in new contexts associated with the transmission of techniques and concepts by way of personal transmission and practice. Thus, the ‘original dance heritage’ in its principles, characteristic peculiarities, ways of working, and training methods is not preserved in this form, unless care is taken to preserve such a ‘pure’ concrete origin. This ambivalent situation is addressed in the context of the debates surrounding the intangible cultural heritage of modern dance. The fundamental concepts and ways of working are looked up or personally remembered, rediscovered, and reinterpreted or reconstructed in collaborative research projects in theory, archive and practice.. In choreographic processes of the contemporary dance scene and in the field of education, these foundations of the dance heritage are found again in a refined or processed way (cf. argumentations in Fleischle-Braun et al., 2017). This ambivalent situation is the starting point for designing concepts for a implementation of the idea of a living heritage in a way that takes the critical aspects outlined above and, above all, the critical differentiations into account. Illustrative examples that have already been implemented in this context are the project 100xTANZ presented in Sect. 1.2.2 and the Choreografischer Baukasten (Choreographic Toolbox) developed by Gabriele Klein at the Institute for Movement in Hamburg, which will be discussed in more detail in the concluding fifth chapter. In these concepts, the dance heritage is used as a technique and creative potential providing a basis for creative work in dance and, in doing so, allowing technique and idea to live on as means of transmission. In preparation for the possibilities of a practical implementation in this sense, the following chapter deals with the necessary performative methods as scientific approaches to dance practices, to their bodies of knowledge and determinations of the intangible as an intermediate step.

References Bibliography Alkemeyer, T., Boschert, B., Schmidt, R., & Gebauer, G. (Eds.). (2003). Aufs Spiel gesetzte Körper. Aufführungen des Sozialen in Sport und populärer Kultur. UVK. Alkemeyer, T., Brümmer, K., Kodalle, R., & Pille, T. (Eds.). (2009). Ordnung in Bewegung. Choreographien des Sozialen. Körper in Sport, Tanz, Arbeit und Bildung. transcript. Assmann, A. (20063). Erinnerungsräume. Formen und Wandlungen des kulturellen Gedächtnisses. Beck. Assmann, A., & Harth, D. (Eds.). (1993). Mnemosyne. Formen und Funktionen der kulturellen Erinnerung. Fischer.

References

93

Assmann, J., & Hölscher, T. (Eds.). (1988). Kultur und Gedächtnis. Suhrkamp. Barthel, G. (2017). Choreografische Praxis. Vermittlung in Tanzkunst und Kultureller Bildung. transcript. Baxmann, I., & Cramer, F. A. (Eds.). (2005). Deutungsräume. Bewegungswissen als kulturelles Archiv der Moderne. K. Kieser. Bischof, M., & Rosiny, C. (Eds.). (2010). Konzepte der Tanzkultur. Wissen und Wege der Tanzforschung. transcript. Bockrath, F., Boschert, B., & Franke, E. (Eds.). (2008). Körperliche Erkenntnis. transcript. Brandstetter, G., & Wulf, C. (Eds.). (2007). Tanz als Anthropologie. Fink. Brandstetter, G., & Klein, G. (Eds.). (2015). Methoden der Tanzwissenschaft. Modellanalysen zu Pina Bauschs »Le Sacre du Printemps/Das Frühlingsopfer«. transcript. Csordas, T.  J. (1994). Embodiment and experience: The existential ground of culture and self. University Press. Diehl, I., & Lampert, F. (Eds.). (2011). Tanztechniken 2010 – Tanzplan Deutschland. Henschel. Ebeling, K., & Günzel, S. (Eds.). (2009). Archivologie. Theorien des Archivs in Wissenschaft, Medien und Künsten. Kadmos. Fischer, M., & Alarcón, M. (Eds.). (2006). Philosophie des Tanzes. Denkfestival  – eine interdisziplinäre Reflexion des Tanzes. fwpf. Fleischle-Braun, C., Obermaier, K., & Temme, D. (Eds.). (2017). Zum immateriellen Kulturerbe des Modernen Tanzes. Konzepte – Konkretisierungen – Perspektiven. transcript. Gebauer, G., & Wulf, C. (1998). Spiel – Ritual – Geste. Mimetisches Handeln in der sozialen Welt. Rowohlt. Gebauer, G., & Wulf, C. (2003). Mimetische Weltzugänge. Soziales Handeln, Rituale und Spiele, ästhetische Produktionen (Mimetic access to the world. Social behaviour, rituals and games, aesthetic productions). Kohlhammer. Gehm, S., Husemann, P., & von Wilcke, K. (Eds.). (2007). Wissen in Bewegung. Perspektiven der künstlerischen und wissenschaftlichen Forschung im Tanz. transcript. Gugutzer, R. (2004). Soziologie des Körpers. transcript. Gugutzer, R. (Ed.). (2006). body turn. Perspektiven der Soziologie des Körpers und des Sports. transcript. Haller, M. (2014). Abstimmung in Bewegung. Intersubjektivität im Tango Argentino. transcript. Hardt, Y., & Stern, M. (2011). Choreographie und Institution. Zeitgenössischer Tanz zwischen Ästhetik, Produktion und Vermittlung. transcript. Hillebrand, M., Krüger, P., Lilge, A., & Struve, K. (Eds.). (2006). Willkürliche Grenzen. Das Werk Pierre Bourdieus in interdisziplinärer Anwendung. transcript. Hörning, K. H., & Reuter, J. (Eds.). (2004). Doing culture. Neue Positionen zum Verhältnis von Kultur und sozialer Praxis. transcript. Huschka, S. (Ed.). (2009). Wissenskultur Tanz. Historische und zeitgenössische Vermittlungsakte zwischen Praktiken und Diskursen. transcript. Jahn, T., Wittrock, E., & Wortelkamp, I. (Eds.). (2016). Tanzfotografie. Historiografische Reflexionen der Moderne. transcript. Jeschke, C. (1983). Tanzschriften  – ihre Geschichte und Methode: Die illustrierte Darstellung eines Phänomens von den Anfängen bis zur Gegenwart. Comes Verlag. Kämpfe, V. (2018). Kulturerbe Tango. Tanz, Politik und Kulturindustrie. transcript. Keller, R., & Meuser, M. (Eds.). (2011). Körperwissen. VS. Klein, G. (Ed.). (2004). Bewegung. Sozial- und kulturwissenschaftliche Konzepte. transcript. Klein, G. (Ed.). (20192). Choreografischer Baukasten. Das Buch. transcript. Klein, G., & Zipprich, C. (Eds.). (2002). Tanz. Theory. Text (Jahrbuch Tanzforschung Bd.12). LIT. Lepecki, A. (2006). Option Tanz. Performance und die Politik der Bewegung. Theater der Zeit (Routledge 2006). Nora, P. (1990). Zwischen Geschichte und Gedächtnis. Wagenbach. Polanyi, M. (2009/1966). The tacit dimension. The University of Chicago Press

94

3  Performative Doing as a Living Archive of Cultural Practices

Quinten, S., & Schroedter, S. (Eds.). (2016). Tanzpraxis in der Forschung  – Tanz als Forschungspraxis. Choreographie – Improvisation – Exploration. transcript. Ryle, G. (1969). Der Begriff des Geistes. Reclam. / traduccion from Ryle Gilbert (1949). The concept of mind. University of Chicago Press. von Laban, R. (1928). Schrift-Tanz. Universal Edition. von Laban, R. (1955). Kinetographie – Labanotation. Florian Noetzel. von Laban, R. (2003). Die Kunst der Bewegung. Florian Noetzel. Wehren, J. (2016). Körper als Archiv in Bewegung. Choreografie als historische Praxis. transcript. Welzer, H. (Ed.). (2001). Das soziale Gedächtnis. Geschichte, Erinnerung, Tradierung. Hamburger Edition. Wulf, C. (2005). Zur Genese des Sozialen: Mimesis, Performativität, Ritual. transcript. Wulf, C. (2006). Anthropologie kultureller Vielfalt. Interkulturelle Bildung in Zeiten der Globalisierung. transcript.

Video Footage Piechaczek, C., & Brinkmann, S. (2016). Etude and variations. Online: https://www.folkwang-­uni. de/de/home/hochschule/projekte-­labs/vollanzeige/?projektid=692. Last access: 14 Nov 2017. Sunday Arts. (2009). Merce Cunningham at 90. Online: https://www.youtube.com/ watch?v=2hLljFBQBN0. Last accessed 27 Jan 2021. TED Talks. (2012). A choreographer’s creative process in real time. Wayne McGregor. Online: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KPPxXeoIzRY. Last accessed 27 Jan 2021. TED Talks. (2018). The process of a choreographer: A new way to view dance. Steven Butler. Online: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hEVQdkRtbqI. Last accessed 27 Jan 2021.

Chapter 4

Performative Methods as an Approach to Dance Practice

The previous chapters have shown that the knowledge associated with movements is increasingly being thought about and that it starts forming part of legitimised discourses. It is receiving more attention both in the context of research and in the field of cultural policy. This refers first and foremost to their value for generating and gaining knowledge, a task that research has ascribed to itself, as well as its relevance in terms of how society functions and can develop. Thus, movement practices are now perceived as socially and individually constitutive repositories of knowledge. This is particularly true for dance practice, since this is where a significant number of complex processes for constituting reality take place. Sections 2.2 and 2.3 have already elaborated on this under the aspect of the intangible and Sect. 3.1 in regard to movement practices. Thus, dance practices can not only be considered as a scientific object of research or function as an instrument of cultural or educational policy, but can themselves be a way of accessing this knowledge in form of a performative method and as a lived practice. If one wants to gain access to dance processes from a scientific perspective, this first requires a conceptualisation specific to the object of study. Initial starting points for this have already been identified in the presentation of the conceptual work by the sociology of movement in Sect. 3.1. Ultimately, such a conceptual foundation provides the argumentative basis for strengthening dance practice at a (cultural) political level. Thus, this chapter approaches methods for generating scientifically relevant knowledge about dance practices as well as in dance practice, based on conceptualisations already elaborated in the context of the research discourse in dance studies.

© The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2023 V. Kämpfe, Dance Practices as Research, Heritage Studies, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-30581-8_4

95

96

4  Performative Methods as an Approach to Dance Practice

4.1 Dance Knowledge – Danced Knowledge Contributions from academic and artistic practice show that the field of dance practices is by no means about accumulating knowledge arbitrarily, instead it is perceived in a more nuanced way: “Dance trains sensory perception and sharpens awareness in dealing with oneself and with others. [...] These experiences can ultimately be transformed into knowledge and are thereby useful for everyday practice. Knowledge is thus not acquired here systematically for the sake of knowing about dance, but in an application-oriented way” (Gehm et al., 2007, p. 21). We are apparently dealing with a very specific form of knowledge, mechanisms of experience and processes of cognition that are anchored in practice.

4.1.1 Concepts Related to Dance Practice Like Bourdieu’s concept of ‘taste’ (Distinction), movement style is an important mode of distinction between social groups and is usually actively learned or passively absorbed in the home and community. [...] Its articulation signals group affiliation and group differences, whether consciously performed or not. Jane Desmond: Meaning in Motion, p. 36.

4.1.1.1 Positions Within the Discourse of Dance Studies Movement studies, the sociology of movement and, in particular, dance studies have increasingly and continuously provided conceptual understandings of movement knowledge and theories of bodily practices since the end of the twentieth century. In working through the discourses of the relevant branches of science, it became clear that the paradigm of corporeality in understanding the body-boundness of cultural practices and the paradigm of the performative in understanding the movement-, space- and time-boundness of cultural practices are now unavoidable and established in the discussion. (cf. the preceding argumentations in Sects. 2.2 and 2.3 under the aspect of the intangible and in Sect. 3.1 on the basis of movement practices) This has made it necessary to question and expand established concepts of knowledge. (cf. the preceding descriptions in Sects. 2.1.2 and 3.1) Various epistemological approaches have already addressed this by extending the cognitive connotations of the traditional concept of knowledge to include the incorporated, implicit and performative aspects (various contributions in Klein, 2004 bring these approaches together in a clear manner): • The concept of knowledge in the mimesis concept as a body-based practical knowledge takes the body as starting point of scientific knowledge and the definition of a body-based practical knowledge as a performative and social kind of knowledge .

4.1  Dance Knowledge – Danced Knowledge

97

• Knowledge concepts of the movement sciences, in particular of sports science/ motor control theory, determine body knowledge as body memory of movement and muscle memory and thus as empractical and not reflected. • The concept of body knowledge in the sociology of the body and culture introduces the labelling of body knowledge in its dual perspective of the levels of external and implicit body knowledge, as well as the concept of implicit body knowledge and the associated attributions of incorporation, naturalisation, storage, and reproduction. • The concept of knowledge and cognition in the praxeological approach assumes body-bound practical cognition as well as incorporated knowledge and thus formulates a concept of bodily cognition and body-bound knowledge as well as the significance of forms of cognition and knowledge tied to corporeality. • This is followed by the knowledge concepts of dance studies and cultural sociology as an emergent sociology of movement. Here, approaches for a new concept for the sociology of movement are developed: Movements as body-bound social practices, and knowledge cultures as part of a knowledge concept of practice. This last approach by dance studies and the newly established sociology of movement is – as outlined in the third chapter – the most recent and an innovative approach. It makes a reasonable reference to the preceding research discourses and develops them further by means of newly conceived terminology (Klein, 2004; Brandstetter & Klein, 2015). An independent research discourse of dance knowledge was established. Gehm/Husemann/Wilcke specify a concept of dance knowledge that can be formulated on the basis of this research discourse: “It is a different knowledge than the one we usually accept as rational, technical or discursive knowledge. The arena of this other knowledge is the moving body. The knowledge that is revealed and transmitted in dances and choreographies is dynamic: a bodily, sensory and implicit knowledge. It communicates itself kinetically and kinaesthetically” (Quoted from Brandstetter in Gehm et al., 2007, p. 40). This conceptual foundation is currently being further differentiated and expanded in the developing research discourse on and also in dance practice. Dance studies have established themselves parallel to the sociology of movement only since the 2000s, grounded in cultural studies as well as cultural anthropology and the sociology of the body. Within this framework, researchers who are often at the same time practitioners of dance, or at least cultural practices themselves, develop arguments for understanding dance with a particular focus on aspects of the so-called intangible, at first still in the rather narrow understanding of the ephemeral character of bodily movements, but the complex interweaving and implications of dance processes and its movement material are increasingly taken into consideration(cf. for more detail Sects. 2.2 and 2.3). In the German-speaking context, the government-funded programme TANZPLAN has in the recent years allowed for a first comprehensive series of publications on the state of research on dance in the German-speaking regions that also takes a look at research conducted in France and the USA. The research within the German-speaking context of dance

98

4  Performative Methods as an Approach to Dance Practice

studies sees itself in the tradition of the Tänzerkongresse (dancers’ congresses). It was here that dancers, choreographers, dance educators, critics, theatre makers, musicians and dance enthusiasts first met to discuss and ultimately develop new aspects and perspectives of dance practices. The first dancers’ congresses were initiated by advocates of the youth movement and expressive dance. Three legendary dancers’ congresses took place in Magdeburg and Essen in the 1920s and in Munich in 1930. The German Federal Cultural Foundation initiated an attempt to continue this tradition and organised a German dancers’ congress in 2006 with the aim of highlighting questions, problems, and new lines of development (Gehm et al., 2007, pp. 9–13). In the English-speaking context (prominent figures are above all Thomas, McFee, Desmond, Leigh Foster, Reed, Sheets-Johnstone), dance research was initially strongly oriented towards body concepts due to the distinctive development of modern dance and contemporary dance within the framework of dance studies. Thus, the concept of body knowledge is a well-established epistemological approach since the early 2000s. Parviainen, for example, draws on the concepts of Polanyi and Sheets-Johnstone to formulate the conclusion regarding the epistemological relevance of the concept of body knowledge. Although she does not refer directly to Bourdieu’s concepts, the conclusions for the epistemological principles of dance studies are based on Polanyi and Merleau-Ponty, who explicitly defined body knowledge as a non-rational and incorporated form of knowledge, which, however, necessarily constitutes subject and society (cf. Parviainen, 2002, p. 22/23). Desmond expands the discourse in order to include performative acts. She argues for a stronger focus of movement as a category of social functioning mechanisms and forms of expression, or identity. She situates the kinaesthetic approaches in connection with the semiotic understanding for comprehending dance as a cultural practice in all its forms within cultural studies (cf. Desmond, 1993/94, p. 34/35). Other important aspects of the understanding of dance situations as performative are questions of gender as well as dance as an artistic phenomenon. Within the framework of cultural studies with its focus on popular dance forms, research particularly focuses on the critical potential of dance practice. Reed argues that dance, as a practice that is inevitably linked to the body, also has political implications, which dance studies seeks to comprehend by drawing on anthropological research and postcolonial approaches. In this context, useful concepts – especially with regard to the topic of intangible cultural heritage of dance – such as power, nation, identity, and globalisation are formulated. An important starting point of this position is the paradigm of the body or corporeality as a meaning-bearing and effective aspect within social contexts – the so-called body turn. While Reed’s focus for the analysis of the meaning of dance within social structures is on ethnic identity, postcolonial aspects, and on the question of gender, it nevertheless becomes clear which constituting function dance has for the development of a social structure (group, state) or of actors and that institutional power exerts influence on dance practices. Reed especially emphasises the importance of dance in regard to political ideologies and their strategies for asserting their interests, as well as to the question of identities (cf. Reed, 1998, pp. 503–532).

4.1  Dance Knowledge – Danced Knowledge

99

In the Latin American context, an increasing number of congress papers, academic studies and essays on the body concepts of praxeological research and on the social meaning of cultural practices can be found. With regard to a discussion of the traditional research paradigms, intellectuals from the Latin American continent support those European voices that call for the consideration of intangible aspects in the same understanding as outlined in the second chapter of this study: the conception of practice as a mechanism or as an organism and the understanding of practices as distinct from the concept of the object. The authors associated with the Latin American academic discourse support the approaches towards a praxeological research by referring to the approaches of practice theory in order to focus on cultural practices, on their modes of action and on aspects of subjectivity (most notably Galak (2010): El concepto cuerpo en Pierre Bourdieu; Gutiérrez (2004): Poder, hábitus y representaciones; Polti (2010): Las formas contemporáneas del tango). There are also some initial studies on the current changes in tango as a concrete example of an already recognised intangible cultural heritage of dance, especially with a focus of changes resulting from the nomination processes as intangible cultural heritage (cf. in Liska (2009): El tango como disciplinador de cuerpos ilegítimos-­legitimados and Pelinski (2000): Tango nómade). Reference should be made to Polti in particular. In relation to tango, she argues for the undeniable corporeality of dance and related, dance and bodily practices. She uses Bourdieu’s theory of habitus to situate their theoretical grasp of perception, differentiation, and categorisation as well as their contextualisation within social structures (Polti, 2010, p. 4ff). 4.1.1.2 Approach to the Concept of Dance Knowledge Due to the complexity of dance situations, it was necessary to first explore existing concepts and to become aware of the different facets and levels of the knowledge specific to dance moments in order to be able to reach a more comprehensive concept of dance knowledge. This has been outlined to a large extent in the third chapter on the value of movement and its determinations. The reflection on related notions of knowledge  – incorporated or non-cognitive forms of knowledge  – is already well advanced in the research discourse outlined earlier. This aspect will be addressed briefly in order to then focus on the possibilities for accessing this so-­ called performative knowledge or knowledge in movement. With the beginning of the 2000s, the focus on the movement practice of dance and on the concept of dance knowledge started to take shape. The current research on dance in the German-speaking context sees itself in the tradition of the dancers’ congresses mentioned above. With regard to a concept of dance knowledge, two starting points become clear: a first focus aims at reflecting on the theoretical and increasingly also methodological approach; a second focus concerns the social and cultural framings of the production and circulation of dance knowledge, as well as the conditions of its social recognition. By tracing the development of dance and by studying contemporary dance practice, categories, functions, and the allocation of

100

4  Performative Methods as an Approach to Dance Practice

value in relation to dance become visible. The assumption is that aesthetic values and cultural knowledge can be assigned to dance practices. At present, they are yet to be formulated through theory building (Gehm et  al., 2007, pp.  9–13). Representatives of dance research postulate dance knowledge as complex. It includes: • a knowledge of dance development • an implicit knowledge of the embodiment of the social (and historical) • the knowledge incorporated through the performance of dance practices. Furthermore, an epistemological problem is identified. This consists in the fact that the non-discursive knowledge in dance is to be formulated as a discursive knowledge transmitted via language. However, there is a commonly used paradigm that describes the almost mythical inexpressibility (in words) of dance. This prototypical figure of thought of the ephemerality and inexpressibility of dance is supposed to distinguish dance from scientific discourse (cf. Thurner, 2009, pp. 33–35). However, the reference to this figure of thought simultaneously prevents the definition of a well-founded concept of movement and dance; and thus, prevents it from finding its appropriate place in the academic discourse. Due to this ambiguous relationship between the premises of dance situations and academic discourses, there is currently a need to find ways of facilitating the comprehension of dance practices within the framework of scientific theory. This involved first and foremost working out the functions and modes of operation of dance practices in the social structure. This was followed by the development of a theoretical conceptualisation in order to identify and formulate the specifics of dance practices. The next step was the search for adequate methodological approaches in order to do justice to the theoretically formulated values and forms of knowledge that can only be experienced on an empractical level (E.g., Gehm et al., 2007, pp. 9–13). The following sections will trace the development of this argumentation.

4.1.2 Importance of Dance Practices in the Social Context In the first decades of the twentieth century, it was a matter of creating a future worth living, a better future, out of the physical presence of the bodies, like striking humanistic sparks from flint. Ritter/Cramer: The Century of Dance, p. 255/256.

With regard to the significance of dance practices for social development, approaches and insights from both traditions of dance studies (in both the anglophone and German-speaking contexts) can be used as starting point for the argumentation. In this context, dance practice is to be understood as a cultural practice that is bound to the body, and in particular stands for the aspects of ephemerality as well as performativity and thus for the so-called intangible. Based on the argumentation around the embodiment of social structures, the focus is on understanding the movement that is directly dependent on the body and its physical characteristics, especially the

4.1  Dance Knowledge – Danced Knowledge

101

movement of dancing, in its functioning within social structures. Pusnik sums up: “In this respect, all contributors to this issue study dance from the broader anthropological and cultural studies perspectives and go beyond narrower conceptualizations of dance as mere physical movement. The field of dance studies, from the anthropological perspective, has been growing in recent decades; in this issue, dance is dealt with as a cultural practice and a social life” (in more detail in Pusnik, 2010, pp. 5–8). Within this research discourse, the following aspects are named for the understanding of dance as body-bound, socially constitutive practices: • The generation of a social space of dance with the associated structural contexts and relationships between the involved actors, material and non-material components. • Connected to this is the correspondence between the conditions of the performance of dance practice with the socially given power relations, institutional and economic infrastructures as well as circulating discourses. • The formation of a dance society or a dance body by means of incorporating processes, which entails that specific physical and habitual abilities, but also norms and values are available to all actors involved as seemingly naturally given dispositions. • In dance practice, the twofold nature argued for cultural practices as socially constituting and constituted is confirmed. • This implies that the constant change observed in social orders is part of the distinctive processual character of dance practice in the same way that the underlying performative character of dance practices both represents processes and is also able to initiate processes outside of the dance situation. • The so-called ephemeral characteristics of the dance practices of ‘proprioception, sensation, emotion and expressivity’, but which are in fact tied to corporeality. • A cultural and experienced or reflected upon (dance) knowledge inherent to dance practices that is always tied to corporeality. Within a praxeological theoretical framework and according to the thesis of the incorporation of social structures (cf. Sect. 1.1.2 for more detail), the aspects mentioned define the correspondence of dance practice with the given social conditions for this concrete space of dance. The incorporation processes consist, on the one hand, in learning and practicing a dance technique that is internalised by the dancer as a movement bound to his or her corporeality to such an extent that it leads to a downright naturalisation of these skills. On the other hand, the practices carried out within these incorporation processes generate the conditions of these forms of transmission in the first place. For the dance practices of tango, Klein illustrates the aforementioned process of naturalisation by means of emotional-affective elements: “The ‘illusio’ of the social field of tango that is generated in this way is produced through an essentialisation of the dance experience, which is interpreted  – retrospectively – as a ‘natural’ experience, as ‘inner movement’, ‘pure emotion’ and as an experience of being present” (Klein, 2009, p. 127). Klein brings the two perspectives of incorporation together in the notion of a ‘performative process in and on the

102

4  Performative Methods as an Approach to Dance Practice

body’. In this process, “the body has a direct effect on the practice, without taking the detour via discourse or consciousness. It is a product of social practice and at the same time the central medium that makes an experience of practice possible in the first place” (ibid., p. 129). She thus understands dance as a social practice, since it simultaneously conveys (dance) knowledge, exercises it, and at the same time constitutes the medium of movement that is the body as well as the space for movement of the dance situation. In addition to these theoretical aspects, an argumentation for definitions of dance as well as conceptions for the safeguarding and transmission of movement practices equally includes aspects relevant to practice. These include the concept of education and associated transmission processes, effects of globalisation from the perspective of social discourses, as well as identity and creativity regarding possibilities for action. 4.1.2.1 Concept of Education and Transmission Processes Just as the concepts of research and cognition have already undergone a paradigm shift in relation to movement practices, changes in the understanding of teaching and learning are also becoming visible. These can already be observed in some first concepts in use. The driving factor behind this is the recognition that the bodily and sensory dimension plays a fundamental role in learning and teaching processes (cf. among others Abraham in Quinten & Schroedter, 2016, p. 22). Furthermore, in the context of transmission processes of incorporated and so-called non-rational knowledge, the concept of education refers to the opposition of education and vocational training. Assmann defines this aptly: “The concept of education [...] is a supplement and corrective to the targeted acquisition of specialised knowledge and expertise. The idea of education represents the counterpoint to the tendency of growing specialisation and fragmentation of knowledge. It reminds us that what matters is not only what one can do, but also what one can be, not only what one knows, but also who one is” (Assmann & Harth, 1993, p. 9). Such kind of demands on education can be traced back to Plato’s concept of education in terms of the holistic ideal of humanity. The following reference to Plato’s concept of education makes clear that it already constitutes the artistic practices as the basis for the later formulated ideal of humanity and as the ideal of education: “There (in the first two books of the Laws) Plato declares that it is by no means sufficient for perfect education to acquaint man from childhood with pains and terrors, so that he may learn to master them. Rather, man should also be introduced to the greatest pleasures and joys from an early age. [...] by this he meant musical education in general [...], the development of the sense of rhythm and harmony in poetic expression and gestures of dance” (Buschendorf in Assmann & Harth, 1991, p. 319). In a critical treatise on the school system, Ivan Illich formulates the demand for new knowledge. Illich was active as a catholic priest for a long time. Based on his practical experience, he called for fundamental reforms in important areas of society. Thus, he postulated the ‘misbelief school’ and called for the ‘de-schooling of society’. He justified these rejections on the grounds that: “learning is mostly the

4.1  Dance Knowledge – Danced Knowledge

103

result of instruction. Certainly, under certain circumstances, instruction can contribute to certain kinds of learning. But most people acquire most of their knowledge outside of school [...]” (Illich, 2003, pp. 30–32). He then goes on to call for access to a wide range of knowledge: “When people grow up, they need access first and foremost to things, places, processes, events and information. [...] This disposition is largely denied today. Access to facts goes far beyond truthful naming and designation” (ibid., p. 178). In addition to this reference to Illich, for a more in-depth reading that formulates alternatives, we should refer to the educator Paulo Freire. In his writings and programmes within the framework of critical pedagogy, he demanded that all kinds of knowledge first be considered as valid, valuable, and therefore to be legitimised. Only through this route could people actually make use of and benefit equally from the possibilities that education offers (cf. in Freire, 2008). With the Waldorf concept, which has been established for several decades and works with the anthroposophical dance art of eurythmy designed by its founder Rudolf Steiner, as well as with the more recent, dance practice-based attempt by the dance teacher Heike Pourian, examples from current teaching practice shall be mentioned at this point (and later on described in more details), which are – unfortunately still  – rather visionary concepts of schooling. While the Waldorf concept basically works with a high proportion of freedom of movement and knowledge transmission through dance, Pourian links learning processes with dance practice by working with Contact Improvisation in the teaching of certain subjects. This makes it particularly clear that movement is not only a repository of knowledge, but can also generate experience and thus cognition and knowledge. The conceptual starting point for arguing such approaches can be found in extending the classical learning typology according to Frederic Vester (Vester, 1975). Based on his research in the natural sciences, Vester succeeded in introducing his approach of systemic or connected thinking into pedagogy. The learning typology, which has been standard literature for teachers in German-speaking countries since the 1970s, is based on the four learning types of the auditory, the visual, the kinaesthetic and the cognitive.1 The extension of this model with regard to experiential or understanding-generating approaches provides for a fifth learning type, the sensorimotor-kinaesthetic (Oppholzer, 2010, p. 12).2 It is possible that the sensorimotor-kinaesthetic approach is not just another learning type, but rather a learning concept that is equally  Vester defines four learning types, each type preferring a form of transmission for new knowledge: the auditory learning type learns primarily through verbal explanations from others; the visual learning type acquires knowledge primarily by observing processes; the kinaesthetic learning type prefers learning by touching and feeling; the cognitive learning type learns primarily through theoretical, intellectual considerations and knowledge. The boundaries of these learning types are fluid. It may well be that a child combines more than one of the four techniques or chooses a different approach in each case, depending on the subject (Vester, 1975, pp.49–52). 2  This extension can be considered meaningful, since the sensorimotor-kinaesthetic experience already plays an important role in learning processes in early childhood. The term sensorimotor describes the interaction of the sensory systems with movements. Kinaesthetics is the teaching of movement perception and the development of a conscious body awareness. From as early as the seventh month of pregnancy, children capable of hearing respond to the mother’s speech as sensory input with precise muscle movement as a motor response (Oppholzer, 2010, p.12). 1

104

4  Performative Methods as an Approach to Dance Practice

i­mportant for all children. This then requires thinking about how more movement can be integrated into the daily classroom routine in accordance with a practical implementation of this form of knowledge transfer. In addition, the status quo in terms of movement in everyday school life should be reconsidered in general, in view of the fact that teacher-centred instruction, cognitive teaching methods, and a general lack of movement are still the norm in many schools. It should therefore be considered in general how movement and dance can enrich the daily school routine of the learners and ensure more motivation and success in learning. It makes sense to take a look at the already existing concepts of schools that follow such an approach. The Waldorf School, which is widely spread in Germany, is an example of a school where movement plays an essential role in the teaching concept. Eurythmy, the anthroposophical art of dance devised by the school’s founder Rudolf Steiner (1861–1925), usually occupies two periods per week in the curriculum, alongside physical education. It is an interplay of movement, gestures, spatial forms, lighting and is accompanied by music, rhythms, and poetry. It focuses on developing the learner’s coordination skills, general body awareness, musical skills, understanding of space and forms, and exposure to poetry. In his works on eurythmy, Steiner describes that “[t]he eurythmy [...] [can] represent soul and spiritual content through bodily movements and gestures (gestures of meaning, sound, sentence, tone and motif)” (Steiner, 1980, p. 21). This represents a source of movement in its own right in everyday school life, but it cannot necessarily be combined with other teaching content. Noteworthy is the already long tradition of this teaching despite the fact that the state school policy has been implementing pedagogically contrasting school concepts in the public education system for decades. At the same time this approach to movement within Waldorf education refers to the intangible cultural heritage ‘Expressions of Modern Dance’ discussed in the first chapter as a living heritage of dance. Interrelationships, impulses, and influences characterise the development of these forms of movement as well as the teaching of eurythmy. In this context, it should not be forgotten that many of the protagonists in modern dance identified themselves with the Lebensreform (life-­ reform) movement and many of them also with Reformpädagogik (the New Education movement). Based on the ideas of Vester/Oppholzer discussed above, it would make sense to teach the content of the curricula with more physical activity on the part of the learners. The dance teacher Heike Pourian works with the contemporary dance style Contact Improvisation in schools, among other places. She aims to make the usual contents more tangible and accessible through movement and dance, in order to enable the learners to learn in a more sustainable and fun way. (Pourian: A touchable world, online) Contact Improvisation is about the free, creative movement of the body and the discovery of all the possibilities of movement that several human bodies can perform together. Her teaching concept focuses on exploring physical laws using one’s own body and thereby making it easier to explain and understand them. For this purpose, the physics lessons of a secondary school were moved to the gym in order to explore the laws of mechanics as well as centrifugal and gravitational forces by moving together. The results of the subsequent test on the material,

4.1  Dance Knowledge – Danced Knowledge

105

which was conducted at a later date, were surprisingly good. This allows us to conclude that learning through physical movement and using one’s own senses clearly contributes to an improved learning experience. At the same time, it motivated the students to continue Contact Improvisation as a break-time activity afterwards. It is not only in schools that Heike Pourian experiments with Contact Improvisation; she also offers seminars in the university context. (ibid.) Thus, it has not only been theorised, but it can also be supported with practical experience, that a change in transmission and teaching processes in education towards a learning through moving is successful. Especially, dance practice can be a useful instrument for conveying content, but also for enabling access to certain perceptions, experiences, and skills in the first place. 4.1.2.2 Effects of Globalisation: Heterology Wulf names another function of dance practices in the context of the process of globalisation. With reference to global social developments, he differentiates between two contrary dynamics: “One aims at levelling cultural differences and aligning global developments with universal norms and values, the other emphasises the differences of cultural, social and economic developments in the various regions of the world. [...] The driving force of one dynamic is the global capitalist economic system, which is geared towards the global production and satisfaction of needs and consumer desires; the driving forces of the other dynamic are the different traditions, ways of life and perspectives on life that play a central role in collective and individual identity” (Wulf, 2006, p. 9). It is within this contradiction that individuals must operate in their everyday life. According to Wulf, this requires new skills. These include dealing with ‘new forms of relative certainty’ as well as a ‘comprehensive understanding of the otherness of other people and cultures’. This requires an attitude in which ‘the foreign is positively valued as an extension of one’s own world’. Furthermore, he considers such interactions, in which ‘the foreign and the own first emerge as foreign and own’, since both do not exist independently of the other, as fundamental for a heterologous social order. Therefore, Wulf calls for an education that teaches cultural competence (ibid., p. 9/10). Wulf further refers to the Delors report to UNESCO, which promotes the vision of a lifelong learning(especially to the fourth chapter: The foreign as correction), and integrates this into his draft of a concept of education (ibid., pp. 27–30). The connection with intangible cultural heritage becomes apparent in his argumentation when he states that such cultural competence can in particular be taught “through the engagement with intangible cultural heritage, i.e., in the form of the ways of life and working, the rituals and dances of other cultures; in intercultural cooperation between schools and universities; in youth exchanges” and by labelling it as a practical form of knowledge (ibid., p. 145). In order to develop appropriate competences, such a system of transmission not only includes theoretical insights, but also demands appropriate practical knowledge. Following the explanations of the previous chapters, this is about those complex, implicit forms of knowledge that

106

4  Performative Methods as an Approach to Dance Practice

are incorporated through processes of socialisation and that each individual person carries within themselves in their very own individual form. They become perceptible first and foremost in a person’s behaviour and way of life. According to Wulf, this practical knowledge enables people to behave properly under the conditions of cultural diversity. Within such an approach to communicating this kind of knowledge it is all the more necessary to address the threats to cultural diversity and to take measures to promote cultural diversity. The difficulties include, on the one hand, to do justice to the claim of cultural diversity, and on the other hand, to not stand in the way of changes in the different cultures (ibid., p. 145ff). At this point, Wulf addresses an ambivalent situation that has already been discussed in a similar way in the context of the debate on intangible cultural heritage in the sense of the demand for a living heritage (cf. Sect. 2.1.2 and the conclusions from the study on the intangible cultural heritage of tango in Sect. 1.3.2 for more detail). 4.1.2.3 Identity and Creativity There are two more arguments concerning the concrete action in practice that seem to be relevant for developing an argumentation of a dance heritage. On the one hand, it is about the individual person carrying out movement practices, that person’s interaction with others and the person’s self-perception.3 On the other hand, it is about the available possibilities of one’s actions. Drawing on the conditions of social incorporation and reproduction processes outlined in the preceding chapters (cf. Sect. 1.1.2 on the characteristics of cultural forms of expression, Sect. 2.3 on the agentiality of all components involved in dance situations and Sect. 3.1.2 on the modes of functioning of movement practices), this refers to the ways in which one can carry out certain practices under the existing circumstances. The first focus is on becoming aware  – through the perception of one’s own movement  – of who one is, how one does certain things, what influences those actions, and how one relates to others, as well as to what extent one’s own movements are subject to what kind of limitations. This kind of awareness necessarily requires engaging in the practices to be perceived in order to experience it. The mere transmission of information cannot achieve this (Roscher, 2003). It can be assumed that a larger unrestricted space for movement enables a wider horizon of experience. In this context, a reference to the remarks of Roscher, an author who is both active in the performance field and researching in movement studies, may help to take this further: “unlike those methods [scientific methods of learning and optimising in sports science], I see in the application of a method that can create awareness in movement the possibility of changing a person’s attitude to their environment and to themselves, of becoming themselves. By developing a freedom in movement, a person can discover their own aliveness. [...] If we want to pass on the method of  For a more in-depth discussion of the aspect of the bodily component of individual action in relation to dance practices, please refer to contributions in Bischof et al., 2006 and Bischof & Lampert, 2020; for the aspect of identity and constitution of the subject, see Klein, 2009, p.17ff. 3

4.1  Dance Knowledge – Danced Knowledge

107

acquiring freedom to our students, we must by no means rest on our knowledge of it. For this is not about a consciousness that we ‘have’, but a consciousness that we ‘are’”(ibid., p. 206/207). Roscher’s statement illustrates the close link between the possibilities of exercising movement within the given social structures, the educational processes that are essential for passing on possible forms of movement as well as becoming aware of them, and the implemented practice of movement options. It is in this complex interactions that the potential of a society for a dynamic development is decided. A second focus is on the possible ways of acting, in particular on creative practices, as they are conditioned by the general level of (living) knowledge and (exercised) practices. This means that creative and spontaneous behaviour must be able to draw on habits. By implication, a wide range of possibilities in terms of conscious and unconscious knowledge as well as possible ways of moving provides the basis for the creative and diverse development of the individual and society (Klein, 2004, pp. 23–108; pp. 217–264, among others). As one of the first authors and in preparation for such arguments regarding the identity-constituting and development-initiating significance of dance practices, Judith Lynne Hanna, who has a background in cultural anthropology and conducts research in dance studies, postulated the much-cited ‘to dance is human’ as early as the 1970s.. She defined dance as a human behaviour covering multiple modes of functioning. Hanna translated this approach into a comprehensive sociological perspective from which to inquire into the constitution and agency of communities (cf. Hanna, 1987). She differentiated dance on various levels relevant for society. Thus, dance stands first of all for physical behaviour in the sense of the physical movement of the performer; at the same time, dance is cultural behaviour in the understanding that it is a practice conditioned by social circumstances, which constitute an expression of sophistication of the same; dance is social behaviour in that, like all social practices, it is shaped by conditioning through socialisation; dance is also psychological behaviour in terms of its mental and affective function and effect; dance practice also produces economic behaviour in that it is practised with use of its product character; dance can be identified as political behaviour in the sense of its interest-driven use; finally, dance functions as communicative behaviour in terms of the aspects of conveying meaning or body language in dance practice (Hanna, 1987, p. 3/4). Her differentiations of dance continue to be used and, where necessary, are expanded in the discourse of dance studies. McFee, for example, argues that this understanding of a functionality of dance categorises and fixes it too strongly. She also understands dance practices as aesthetic movement: “dance is indeed ‘a special kind of movement’ (Hirst), but that its distinctiveness lies in the way we look at it” and thus provides a further category: dance is aestheticised movement (McFee, 1992, p. 51). What makes dance special is that it is not simply based on dance movements, in the sense of a composition of acted-out sequences of movement, but that it corresponds to a much more complex moment of the most diverse aspects. These have already been illustrated in previous argumentations (again, reference is made to Sects. 1.1.2, 2.3 and 3.1.2 of this study). The dance heritage to be defined and valued finds itself, is practiced and passed on in between the conflicting priorities of different modes of forgetting and

108

4  Performative Methods as an Approach to Dance Practice

safeguarding. This challenging situation must be approached with the demand for a living culture and living heritage. Aspects to be considered and at the same time necessary socio-political conclusions that demand for the recognition of the social relevance of dance practices4 are: • recognition of incorporated knowledge and so-called intangible values as constitutive of social relations; • acknowledgement of their immense creative and stimulating potential for social, but also individual development: • implementation of both aspects in the context of cultural policy as well as in the education sector; • necessity of concepts for the safeguarding and transmission of movement knowledge as well as the specificity of dance practice. (ibid.) In the following section, these aspects concerning the relevance of dance practices for social development and the demands arising from thus will be addressed with a focus on dance moments. This will finally allow for a description of the specific characteristics of dance practices that are of interest if one wants to generate knowledge that is relevant to academic research by means of performative approaches.

4.2 Approaches to Dance Practice Most concepts used in dance studies in attempts to understand and describe dance moments are based on arguments related to the concept of movement. As was established in Sect. 3.1, movement functions as a basic principle in the constitution of society. This statement is now also asserted for the significance of dance in relation to individual and social development. It is about the interwoven social constitution of individual and communal modes of action and their appreciation of these, about the conditions and conditionalities of exercising them in practice, and about modes of transmission of practices and the implicit knowledge they contain. In the previous section, this was presented in more concrete terms using the example of educational processes and innovative-creative potentials. The attempts to define dance situations are based on fundamental aspects of the concept of movement, which are further specified for the dance moment. These are explored in the following sections. This includes corporeality, on the one hand in the attribution of its cultural materiality and on the other hand in the specific quality of movement that can only be generated through dance (training) practice and the characteristic dancer’s body. Furthermore, the aspect of processuality in relation to the generation and practice, as well as the effectiveness of dance movement, is also included. In this context, concepts of authentic acting in dance, of change and transformation of dance  More detailed argumentation in relation to cultural heritage and dance can be found in Brandstetter & Wulf, 2007, pp.121–131. 4

4.2  Approaches to Dance Practice

109

practices as well as their presence or ephemerality are questioned in regard to the categories of space, time, and corporeality. Last but not least, every dance situation as well as the practice of movement implies both its conditioning through previous processes of incorporation as well as the potential to perceive them, to break with them, and to allow for other options. Only an analysis of these aspects can provide a differentiated perspective on how dance practices can be perceived, described, and communicated appropriately. This concern, which at first seems mostly relevant to research, becomes especially significant when it comes to a dance heritage that is to be preserved and at the same time kept alive, as is intended in the context of the efforts to safeguard intangible cultural heritage.

4.2.1 (In)tangible Implications of Dance Moments The dancer works on the moment, but also ‘in’ the moment. The complete presence in the moment, without delay or fixating anticipation, makes up the quality of a dance act all by itself. Laurance Louppé: Poetics of Contemporary Dance, p. 135.

4.2.1.1 The Cultural Materiality of Bodies When reviewing the research approaches to dance practices, it becomes clear that the basic paradigm of corporeality is further inscribed with a cultural materiality (according to Hahn & Meuser, 2002). With the re-introduction of the materiality of the body into the discussion, body phenomenological and body anthropological concepts are relied upon. These initially separate the body and corporeality conceptually. Decisive for the differentiation of both aspects of the body is its perception: “One’s own body is an object insofar as it can be perceived by others from the outside. The body as subject, that is, one’s own body, on the other hand, can only be perceived from within” (Gugutzer, 2004, pp. 152–154). It is concluded that a clear-­ cut determination of subjective perception is impossible. Instead, it is suggested to speak of ‘bodily state, bodily impulse and sensing through one’s own body’ in the sense of a bodily perception and experience. Posture as well as ways of feeling and thinking are thereby understood as socially formed. More figuratively, this refers to the raised chest, the sneaking past, a slouched posture, all of which stand for an individual sense of self and for a corresponding individual way of acting. (ibid.) The question of how to then deal with the aspect of the organic level, in terms of the body that is perceived by others, is raised in a more detailed part of the discussion. The consensus on this can be described by the concept of the ‘cultural materiality body’: “The body possesses a material autonomy [...] and reacts within the framework of its possibilities and limits. At the same time, in this materiality, the body is exposed to cultural influences and is a product of these formative influences, and, moreover, it is only ever perceptible in a culturally specific way” (Strauss in

110

4  Performative Methods as an Approach to Dance Practice

Gugutzer, 2004, p. 35). In this definition by Strauss, from a cultural anthropological perspective, the organic and movement-mechanical constitution of the human body, understood as material, is first taken as a starting point in order to postulate given movement options and their limitation both in a way that can be traced back to body mechanics and to socialisation processes. An important aspect, especially with regard to the perceptibility of moments of movement, is addressed by referring to the individual constitution of the perceiver. Due to their own organic and social conditioning, they can never fully experience the self-perception of others. This shows that the perceived corporeality in dance moments can be traced back to given bodily-organic conditions, to the processes of inscription through certain forms of training and ways of moving generated by processes of socialisation, to the individual habitus and possibilities of movement arising from these conditions, and last but not least to the constitution of the perceiver, who is conditioned in the same way. Thus, the material perceptibility of the body through forms of movement and its staging in space as well as in relation to the other reflects the respective cultural conditioning. 4.2.1.2 Ephemerality and Presence In addition to the material constitution of corporeality described above, the concept of the ephemerality of dance moments in the discourse about dance is named as one of the particularly characteristic categories (cf. various contributions in Klein & Zipprich, 2002 as well as Wagner in Fischer & Alarcón, 2006). This was initially a distinctive label for dance practices and was increasingly subjected to criticism. The core assumption is that in dance, the moment of its creation, is at the same time also the moment of its disappearance. However, this would then equally include the bodywork performed by the dancers in the run-up to a dance situation as well as the entire infrastructural conditionality of its production as well as its accompanying processes of perception and reception, as has been elaborated in Sects. 2.2 and 2.3. The criticism of this premise therefore wants the dancer to be integrated into social events on the basis of the cultural materiality of corporeality and its options for movement that has been described above (Lepecki, 2006, p.  183). The counter-­ thesis finally names the coincidence of the dance moment with the presence of the dancer as an essential quality of the dance moment. The notion of ephemerality finds its antithesis in the complete presence of the dancer in the dance moment (Louppé, 2009, p. 135). In this context, the space in which the dance moment is located is of importance. The created dance space is understood as the shaping of an inner emotional or aesthetic world of imagination. In this way, the self-fashioning and self-perception of the dancer is manifested in dance space as body-bound and thus materialised movement. By situating it in real space and in the choreography of movement performed in it, the dance moment is no longer reduced and limited to the fleeting moment (in Barthel, 2017, pp. 27–44, among others). Going back to the above-­mentioned processes of inscription, production, and reception, one can also refer to the earlier

4.2  Approaches to Dance Practice

111

discussed aspects of the performed bodywork in dance and the connected processes of bodily inscription, the agentiality of all material components involved in the dance situation, as well as the processes of change that take place in the dance practice itself as well as initiated by it, simultaneously or afterwards, both as material and social or individual conditioning. This reveals that dance moments are by no means merely fleeting, but that this momentarily perceived fleetingness forms part of processes of development and change. 4.2.1.3 Concepts of Change and Authenti(ci)ty In the search for terms to describe dance practice, in particular the processes of change and development that can be perceived, the terms change and authenti(ci)ty are also used (e.g. various contributions in Carter, 2006; Wagner in Fischer & Alarcón, 2006; various contributions in Bischof & Rosiny, 2010). Following her investigation of traditional dance forms and rites, the cultural anthropologist Danilyn Rutherford observed: “To embody what is authentic always means to see oneself from the perspective of outsiders [...] there remains an aftertaste of the foreign: tradition becomes construction; performativity becomes enactment” (Rutherford in Brandstetter & Wulf, 2007, p. 304). This shows how a value is assigned on the basis of authenticity and how this changes the self-perception as well as the perception by others. In addition to research on traditional dance practices and their changes in the course of social developments, in which the aspect of authentic practice or staged performance named by Rutherford is an issue, dance studies is discussing the concepts of change and authenti(ci)ty in a broader sense within the context of reconstruction projects of historical dances. The debate addresses the oppositions of authenticity and interpretation. The fact is stated that reconstruction can only approach an interpretation and thus the authentic aura cannot be reproduced. In this opposition, the reconstructed original choreography finds itself detached from the ‘spirit of the time’. For how should we even know with certainty today how it was? (This question is explored in much detail in relation to the reconstruction work of Pina Bausch’s Sacre; see Brandstetter in Brandstetter/Klein 2015, pp. 93–122 and the interview between Klein and Barthels in ibid., pp. 83–89). This concerns not only the dance work itself and the so-called contextual zeitgeist, but also the concrete situation of performance and reception. Thus, according to Janez Jansa, reconstructions are not possible simply “because the audience cannot be reconstructed” (Odenthal, 2019, p. 267). Reflecting further on this concrete dance situation, this applies equally to technical, material, and infrastructural conditions. With these questions in mind, it is worthwhile to revisit elaborate and successful reconstructions. For example, the new production of the Triadic Ballet directed by Ivan Liška and with the dancers of the Bavarian State Ballet, using re-created costumes and plastic clothing. (viewable at ECHO online (2016): Triadic Ballet at Staatstheater Darmstadt. Online: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v =eUobt_ t9LZ0) The reconstruction work realised by danceLab Berlin – el circulo eterno. A homage to Harald Kreutzberg – on the other hand, works more freely in the use of

112

4  Performative Methods as an Approach to Dance Practice

the qualitative movement categories of the dancer Kreutzberg. (viewable at DanceLab Berlin (2016): El circulo eterno. Homage to Harald Kreutzberg. Online: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xmx-­mLEuQXA) In exploring the conditions of a reconstruction work of dance, the stated impossibility of a faithful reproduction of a dance situation, which can never be the same, is interpreted as a creative impulse. Thus, reconstructions of dance works that are as faithful to the original as possible can ultimately secure a dance heritage and convey the present as a living heritage.

4.2.2 Physical-Aesthetic Qualities in Dance A dancer is that person who consciously strives to weave clear understanding, deep feeling and strong will into a harmoniously balanced whole that is nevertheless flexible in the interrelationships of its parts. Rudolf von Laban, according to Fischer/Alarcon: Philosophy of Dance, p. 5.

In the context of reconstructing dance movement, the importance of physical-­ aesthetic work becomes particularly clear. This includes first and foremost the development of ways of moving, forms of expression and choreographic styles. This process of development is in turn based on a differentiated perception of the movement technique to be taught and the corresponding body-mechanical training of the dancing body. These qualities will be discussed in this section. 4.2.2.1 Quality of Movement (Expressiveness) The concept of the quality of movement asks about the expressiveness of movement. The focus shifts to how a certain expression of a movement is evoked. Since it can be assumed from a body-mechanical perspective that a certain intended expression cannot already be inherent in an object or a movement, but nevertheless certain thoughts and feelings are apparently communicated through movement sequences, it is sought to find out in what way this happens (e.g., McFee, 1992; Bischof et al., 2006, pp. 107–171; Alkemeyer et al., 2009). This means, in a simplified way, to what extent a dance can be or seem sad or happy. It is assumed that it is by no means the performers or the objects themselves that must have this expression (for example, a sad dancer), but rather a particular way of moving or formations of objects and movements that generate the expression in the first place (cf. McFee, 1992, p.  242/243). A certain expression of a dance movement must therefore be generated by certain techniques or qualities in order to be conveyed and perceived as such. Thus, this clarifies two categories of expressiveness that at first seem very similar, yet are essentially different: “It is two similar sorts of remarks, but for dance, that we are referring to in speaking of accounts of the expressiveness or expressive qualities of dance.” (ibid.) On the one hand, it is about the perception of dance movement in its sensory-aesthetic and expressive impressions, which are to be differentiated, while on the other hand, it is about finding out through which

4.2  Approaches to Dance Practice

113

mechanical characteristics a dance movement is generated in such a way that it can convey certain modes of expression. The latter dance category can be traced back to Rudolf von Laban and is included in his movement analysis as a quality of movement or also expressive power. It will be presented in the following fifth chapter. 4.2.2.2 Physical Signature and Bodywork In his writings on movement, Laban establishes the first statements on a so-called bodily signature. The bodily signature consists in the inscription of a concrete possibility in the body resulting from a previous bodywork. In this sense, bodies do not exist, but are permanently in a process of changing bodily states. The more numerous the different body signatures, the more diverse and different are the possible shapes that the body can produce and take. Laban refers to these individual, differentiated shapes as the style of the moving person (cf. Louppé, 2009). At the same time, this danced style has to be seen in the broader context of its social embeddedness: “Every culture develops characteristic modes of expression, styles that embody how people relate to their world, to things, how they ‘have’ their world. Style is a way of positioning oneself in relation to the world” (Fritsch, 19992, p. 226). Another aspect in the research discourse is bodywork. Bodywork in the sense of a dancer’s body creation is performed by the dancer by means of and with reference to his or her dance practice. In order to be able to realise dance techniques and forms of movement, the dancer must develop a specific dancer’s body with a training designed for this purpose. This includes the incorporation and naturalisation of specific body mechanics and ways of moving. Each dance movement corresponds to an ideal dancer’s body or a body ideal, which can be achieved by means of dance training – dance bodywork. Such systematic training requires discipline on the part of the dancer and shapes a dancer’s work attitude. Furthermore, the aspect of time plays an important role, because such bodywork requires continuous dance work. As a result of successful bodywork, the dancer generates his or her own aesthetics of dance movement (Leigh Foster in Desmond, 2006, pp. 236–241). Based on this dance bodywork, the characterising and at the same time constitutive qualities of movement can be determined. The first is the already mentioned quality of movement, which generates expressive power. It is inherent in an object or movement as a perceptible, specific expression. This means that a dance can have a certain emotive effect in that a certain way of moving or shaping objects and movements generate expression through specific mechanical characteristics of the movements. There are other aspects that are closely connected with the generation and perception of this expressive power of movement. Thus, movement spaces significantly influence the quality of movement. The movement space corresponds to the totality of relations between any movement in a spatial structure. A permanent dialectical relationship between actor, space, and movement is constituted. Furthermore, rhythm is named. Rhythm is not understood as an additional quality of movement, but reveals a constitutive character of consistency and characteristic between music, dancer, and movement in the dance moment as well as its perception. Finally, the category of the sensitive and the affective plays a constitutive role.

114

4  Performative Methods as an Approach to Dance Practice

Research from sports science, motor control theory and the sociology of movement has shown that movements are on the one hand constitutive for and on the other hand conditioned by processes of perception, thinking, and feeling (Haitzinger in Huschka, 2009, pp.  87–94 as well as Fischer-Lichte, 2016, pp.  129–239, among others; cf. also Sects. 1.1.2 and 3.1.2 in this study).

4.2.3 Dancing as Thinking Space Creating spaces in which thinking can take place. Gerald Siegmund: William Forsythe, p. 9. The body thinks. It is form that thinks its way through time. Dana Caspersen in ibid., S.107.

Despite such a differentiated conceptualisation, movement and dance practices are by no means merely about accumulating knowledge arbitrarily, but also about a “practical and sensorial-intelligent approach to understanding those experiential processes and contexts that produce knowledge and make it accessible” (Gehm et al., 2007, p. 21). An example of such a hierarchy of knowledge production that is to be dissolved, especially through the inclusion of practical knowledge, is the approach of the dancer and choreographer Pina Bausch, who “began by asking her dancers questions and listening to their answers, thereby redistributing the positions of those in the know by means of speech” (quoted from Lepecki, in ibid., p. 117). Here, an epistemological shift in the history of knowledge of modernity is stated, in that before a new kind of dance situation is created, all participants share a common ground of a non-knowledge, which builds up into a repository of shared knowledge as the movement choreography is elaborated. In a more detailed analysis of Pina Bausch’s work and ways of working, the demand for the recognition of practical knowledge and informal forms of knowledge is confirmed (cf. on this in Brandstetter & Klein, 2006 and Klein, 2019a). 4.2.3.1 ‘Another’ Way of Thinking Based on this line of thought, positions in philosophy of dance place the body’s own intelligence of perception and movement, which is independent of rational reasoning, as well as sensitivity and affectivity alongside rational thinking within the options for thinking. Accordingly, movement or dance can be ‘liberated from its opposition to thought’ in order to think of it as an aspect ‘within the options for thinking’, in turn as ‘a new possibility of thinking’ (Wagner in Fischer & Alarcón, 2006, p. 11). These possibilities can be placed in relation to each other: “But this does not make thinking in itself incompatible with dance. Thinking is a specific tool that is available to human beings. [...] In action (dance, movement, improvisation) thinking is always slower than physical action. So that it becomes an obstacle when the dancer considers the solutions and suggestions that thinking finds as more

4.2  Approaches to Dance Practice

115

important than those of the body” (ibid., p. 14). As a consequence, it can be constated that different aspects of perceiving and acting correspond to the different possibilities of thinking, as well as that these are of importance depending on the aim, intention, and circumstance. Wagner defines a concept of knowledge generation and its transmission within the broader concept of thinking, in that the physical or body-bound movement, such as dance, has a fundamental function. The body-­ bound knowledge and body-transmitted actions are attributed an almost visionary quality, which is described as ‘resistance against the mechanisation and rationalisation of the world’. Wagner affirms this function with the enabled plurality of the cognitive faculty (ibid., pp. 8–13). The question to what extent such multiplicity is given remains unanswered; but also, to what extent multiplicity needs to be brought together for a gain in knowledge. As a consequence, it should be questioned whether body-bound knowledge, its experiencing, mediating, and exercising has to be placed into the rationalistic concept of knowledge or whether this knowledge mechanism is an independent option that has to be argued with regard to its autonomy. 4.2.3.2 Critical Potential Another aspect of dance practice to consider is its inherent critical potential. Looking at his own experience of dance performance from a research perspective, Lepecki postulates that movement or dance practices have such a potential on the one hand as a ‘free associative space’ within existing (thought) structures, and on the other hand as a ‘reflexive practice of breaking with and disrupting structural relationships’ (Lepecki, 2006). Based on this, he demonstrates its critical potential for the current state of artistic dance development at the beginning of the twenty-­first century. His argument is that the artistic dance of the Western cultural tradition has developed within a social order of modernity. One of its fundamental categories is movement in the sense of dynamism, progress, and mobility. On the other hand, the political and economic power structures of modernity, which hold the authority over the accepted understanding of movement, are nevertheless dependent on the stability of their structural relations. Thus, the break with and disruption of the ever-­same and yet dynamic pattern of movement of social development can be understood as a critical moment in the continuous flow of movement. Insofar as spaces exist – as physical spaces and as mental spaces of association – in which subjects can exercise their flow of movement (forms of movement and ways of moving as well as their own dynamics and rhythms) without having to limit themselves to recognised and thus limiting forms of movement, an effective break with habitual dynamics and ways of development can be brought about. Lepecki bases this on the thesis of a functional connection between the recognised concept of movement, modernity as a social order, and political practices (cf. Brandstetter & Wulf, 2007, p. 98). This two-fold nature of movement gives rise to what Lepecki sees as the dance-­ specific starting points of reflection and critique, or the option as critical potential (Lepecki, 2006, p.  23). Within this critical thinking, the function of (especially dance) movement is repeatedly referred to within the framework and understanding

116

4  Performative Methods as an Approach to Dance Practice

of a social canon of movement. This refers to the argument of social inscription. There is already a widespread consensus on the fundamental theoretical question of whether and to what extent everything social or social structures are constituted through the practices of the body: what counts as the habitual practices of movement are not naturally given, but are socially formed. Accordingly, this canon of habitual forms of movement varies across cultures, societies, and groups, respectively. Within the given subject area, the question therefore arises as to why the dance movement is included in the canon of recognised movements in occidental culture in only low, albeit currently increasing esteem, and what consequences result from this; or, in a reverse line of thought, what the re-inclusion of dance movement in the everyday canon of movement would mean. In doing so, the formative power of the movement masses should be taken into account, which can all too easily be misused for ideological purposes by totalising movement systems. This was done, for example, with the movement canon in National Socialist sport. Movement practices were seen as the regeneration of a national body, which was to be achieved through disciplinary and formative physical training. In this totalitarian reversal of the potential inherent in movement practice, the ‘free associative space’ was largely predetermined and the options of a critical reflection or disruption systematically excluded (cf. Fritsch, 19992, p. 85/86; Brandstetter & Wulf, 2007, p. 219/220 and p. 184/185).

4.3 Safeguarding and Transmission of Dance Knowledge How can the complex and multi-layered knowledge of dance knowledge be determined in order to safeguard and transmit it in an adequate manner in the sense of a dance heritage? Taking the implications of dance practice outlined in the previous chapters into account, the following section presents approaches that try to do justice to this objective in research work as well as in dance practice itself. The focus lies on the different conceptual works of already existing or formerly functioning collections, inventories, and archives. The respective working methods can be regarded as tried and tested methods for enabling and using access to the specific knowledge of the performative located in dance practice.

4.3.1 Knowledge Within the Performative From time to time, however, new forms unfold that have something special about them; something that harnesses already existing actors, things, and institutions into a new fabric; a structure that makes things happen in a different way. Paul Rabinow from Fischer-Lichte: Performativity, p. 183.

So far, it has become clear that dance knowledge is multi-layered and complex. This is especially true with regard to making it accessible not only within the

4.3  Safeguarding and Transmission of Dance Knowledge

117

context of dance research, but also in order to preserve and communicate it in the sense of a dance heritage. In this respect, it makes sense to differentiate between three levels, following the theoretical positions outlined in the previous chapters. The first level of a knowledge of dance refers to the description of dance moments and generates a systematic knowledge of dance styles, dance genesis and the specificity of dance forms. A second level of a knowledge about dance is generated through the analysis of the circulating discursive knowledge, providing a structural knowledge of the embodiment of the social and political in dance situations. A third level of a knowledge through dance refers to one’s own bodymechanical, sensory and emotional experience. This is an implicit knowledge that encompasses the specific implications of the concrete performance of dance practices as well as bodily dispositions, skills, and abilities of the dancer. This knowledge through dance is usually described as ephemeral, as it has hitherto been considered neither formulable nor exercisable through cognitive processes. It is located in the concrete exercise of dance practice and thus tied to the physicality of all participants, to a spatial allocation and temporal sequence. Thus, it can be agreed that this knowledge is archived in corporeality. However, it has already been made clear that physicality alone, even if it has already been brought into connection with movement, cannot describe dance moments. The processuality inherent to the process of becoming dance is only found in the concept of performativity. Performative knowledge still means, in the proper sense, an understanding that acting – performing – is, on the one hand, tied to the body or a medium and, on the other, based on linguisticity. In terms of its etymological derivation, this means that the performance of selected practices is characterised by meaning, concept, structure and its realisation as an action in space and time.(cf. Sect. 1.1.2 on cultural practices in performative description) Now, the question is whether this applies to dance or dance moments and to what extent it is possible to assign knowledge, ability and experience belonging to dance situations to linguistic categories. Due to the complexity of dance situations, it does not seem sufficient to limit their knowledge. If one really wants to grasp different kinds of knowledge and generate insights on the three levels mentioned, then a purely theoretical preoccupation with the object of investigation must consequently be extended to a practical or empractical level. Experiencing and understanding the dancing movement through the senses can capture the dance movement as something implicit in terms of emotive, perceptive as well as body-mechanical sensory perceptions. Practical research in dance ultimately means that engaging in dance practice implies and produces its own knowledge. As a consequence, it can then correspond to scientific work under certain conditions. A research situation can arise in the dance situation or in the performance of dance practices, which gives access to knowledge that can only be generated in this way. It is thus predestined for research in practice, as presented in Sect. 1.1.3. In some of the following conceptions of an archive of the performative, such approaches are already implemented. This allows for the knowledge of the performative inherent in dance practice to be integrated into the practices of safeguarding and transmitting dance.

118

4  Performative Methods as an Approach to Dance Practice

4.3.2 Concepts for Archiving the Performative Dance, on the other hand, precisely its absence in the archives of art and culture, makes visible that even the supposedly static, manifest memory of culture, standardised in orders of knowledge, is dynamic: contingent and in unmanageable motion. Brandstetter/Wulf: Dance as Anthropology, p. 87.

Once knowledge has been recorded and described, adequate forms are needed for its safeguarding and transmission. The discussion of dance knowledge so far shows that such an archive of movement and dance practices requires new approaches and that previous archive concepts of collecting, safeguarding, documenting, and ensuring accessibility must be rethought. For the field of dance knowledge, representative examples of approaches to this safeguarding and transmission work that precede as well as accompany these theoretical developments can be presented. 4.3.2.1 Archives Internationales de la Danse One example, at a very early stage in the discourse on movement, is the archival concept of the Archives Internationales de la Danse (AID). They were founded in Paris in 1931 by Rolf de Maré, patron of the Swedish Ballet. In this concept, a media-based archive is set up in order to gather knowledge in one place. In addition to conventional media such as objects, documents, photographs and film recordings, the body itself in its practical dance performance is considered to be a medium (cf. Gehm et  al., 2007, pp.  219–221). The following describes the Archives Internationales de la Danse in more detail: “Against a linguisticisation of dance that reduces it to the procedures of written culture, de Maré wanted to establish movement as an independent form of knowledge. The AID gave this special knowledge a place. The aim was to create a gathering place, a new kind of international institution for dance. The aim was not only to bring together knowledge about dance, but also to make it fruitful for practice in an exchange between practitioners, theorists of various kinds and interested laypeople. The AID organised exhibitions, choreographic competitions, lectures, dance performances of various styles as well as origins, and published a journal that appealed to a broad audience, from dancers and choreographers to scholars and interested laypeople. Sociologists, ethnologists, dancers, painters, writers, and filmmakers met here. [...] The variety of materials gathered went far beyond artistic dance and ranged from dance representations in the arts to records of choreographies, dance and music notations, ethnological material, and folk dances to documents of dance techniques of all cultures [...]” (quoted from ibid., p. 226). In this conception, the body is already understood as a repository of movement knowledge and sensory experiences. This posed a fundamental challenge to outdated notions of collecting and categorising documents or artefacts in archival work. The practices of collecting, conserving and documenting had to be designed in a more inclusive way for the creation of an archive of movement and dance.

4.3  Safeguarding and Transmission of Dance Knowledge

119

4.3.2.2 Performative-Artistic Archive by Susan Melrose Furthermore, Susan Melrose’s concept of a performative archive can be cited as a conceptual perspective. In this concept for archiving from the early 2000s, the archive detaches itself from media-transmitted content as well as from time-­ displaced and remotely located knowledge. In line with the idea of performativity, the archive exists in the concrete moment of dance or in the creation, presentation, and reception of the dance situation. This reflects the understanding that every performed practice carries the entire corresponding knowledge within itself (cf. Gehm et  al., 2007, p.  88/89). In response, the following comment was made on Susan Melrose’s concept of the performative archive: “The archive that Melrose speaks of is not the archive that preserves something that would otherwise be lost: not an archive that comes after the art, when the work is already complete. Melrose claims that every work, because it is composition, choreography, or staging, already contains its own archive as well. ‘The time of the archive’ is present in all phases of artistic work and, in Melrose’s interpretation, is also the medium for closing the cycle and again inspiring new works, new processes of creation.” (quoted from ibid.) This idea of a performance as knowledge would develop into a classical research situation of art research within the framework of research in practice, as presented in Sect. 1.1.3. The archive understands itself as the dance situation in which knowledge becomes accessible and communicable. A speaking of dance is made possible out of the dance practice. 4.3.2.3 Dance Reconstruction Project Temporary Museum Claudia Jeschke chooses the opposite approach from theoretical conception to practice through practical work in the dance reconstruction project she initiated in the early 2000s. The starting point for her exploration of the Chaconne from Mozart’s opera Idomeneo was the theme of body-time and time-body. In this way, she juxtaposes the representations of (supposedly) historical materials with their present-day transmission as a quasi-mobile, ‘temporary museum’ of dance in a way that illustrates the mutual influence and tension that arises in the process. The ‘temporary museum’, a concept that originated in the visual arts, no longer exhibits a universal history there, but ‘becomes a place for the changing exhibitions, for claimed contents, and thus operates with theatricalisations, with the staged visualisations of finite moments’ (cf. in Huschka, 2009, pp. 159–161). Jeschke comments on this in the interview: “One can see the musical composition of the Chaconne as a mirror as well as a stimulus of these new ideas that emerged around 1800. The music seems to quote the formal conditions of the time, to demonstrate the rapid development of new technical standards, and to seek a personal expression of the dancers [...]” (quoted from ibid., p. 160/161). In a comprehensive historical reconstruction work, this conception makes use of all available research approaches to this knowledge (as identified in this chapter) of the dance components in the context of the opera’s practices of composition and performance. In this way, it is possible to understand

120

4  Performative Methods as an Approach to Dance Practice

this work of opera and to work on it in a way that stays true to the original and allows to reconstruct it in practice through critical and exploratory training, rehearsals, and performances. 4.3.2.4 SAPA – Dance Archives in Switzerland These three approaches, which are located in the practice of dance but differ from one another, are reflected in archive concepts that are currently being developed. Their tools are generated from the current research discourse in dance studies and at the same time shape this discourse through their work. The Swiss dance archives play a leading role in the project, which is designed for the long term and has a comprehensive concept. The SAPA Foundation, Swiss Archive of the Performing Arts, is committed to the safeguarding and communication of the performing arts in Switzerland. On the one hand, SAPA is committed to the safeguarding of artefacts produced through rehearsal processes and performances in the fields of dance, theatre, performance, and cabaret. On the other hand, it promotes the visualisation of what has been forgotten and the development of something new by engaging with the existing collections. To this end, the foundation employs various formats, such as research projects, oral history interviews, exhibitions, conversations, and reconstructions. Through a variety of research projects and outreach programmes, SAPA continuously seeks exchange with artists, scholars, and laypersons active in the field of the performing arts (cf. in Hossain in Bischof & Lampert, 2020, p. 39/40). The starting point for SAPA’s work is the idea of the Living Archives: it combines archiving, research, and transmission with an artistic and curatorial practice. It stands for an archiving practice that does not merely aim at preserving the past, but rather assumes a dynamic, creatively productive archival work. Thus, the collections of SAPA’s archive, with all kinds of materials, already represent a basis of knowledge, materials, and creative inputs for contemporary dance and performance works (ibid.; for more detailed descriptions of the kind of archival work done by the SAPA see ibid., pp. 41–46). In addition to these combined archiving forms that include research of documents, material collections and the lived heritage, which are common in the canon of dance studies, there is an extraordinary oral history project on Swiss dance history (available at Stiftung SAPA: Tanzspuren – Eine Oral History der Schweizer Tanzgeschichte. Online: https://sapa.swiss/oral-history/). The basic idea is to seek out prominent figures in dance who are still active or were active in Switzerland in past decades and to conduct interviews with them. The interviews are based on elaborate questionnaires, but the main aim is to open up memory spaces and not to steer information paths by asking too many questions. The interviews will be archived in the classical manner, transcribed, and made available to the researching public. Through these interviews, a world of dance-historical and socio-political facts, individual positioning, memories of encounters and individual experiences, cross-connections within the dance scene, etc. is generated by those who are active in dance themselves. For example, Noemi Lapzeson, who studied with Martha

4.3  Safeguarding and Transmission of Dance Knowledge

121

Graham and danced for many years, gives an insight into her artistic maturation in dance by passing on her experiences and skills in her own dance creations and classes, up to the decision to stop dancing. For the context of Modern Expressive Dance described above, the interview with Ulla Kasics is of particular importance. She studied with Gret Palucca and Rosalia Chladek, among others, met many of the protagonists of Modern Expressive Dance and experienced that time dancing in the midst of their creative work. Thus, this archiving project was able to personally record protagonists of our current dance heritage at the last moment. It is important to bear in mind that some of the interviewees have already passed away or are at least of a very advanced age. In particular, however, the interviews generate a strong emotive involvement of the interviewee, which allows the listener to have an empractical experience. Formulated in an unscientific style, these interviews are very moving (cf. summarised by Wehren in Bischof & Lampert, 2020, pp. 27–37).5 4.3.2.5 TANZPLAN and TANZFONDS ERBE in Germany In Germany, the TANZPLAN Deutschland initiative (2006–2011), funded by the Federal Cultural Foundation, as well as the two subsequent programmes TANZFONDS Partner (2011–2014) and TANZFONDS ERBE (2011–2019), which were also initiated and funded by the Cultural Foundation, are worthy of mention with regard to this kind of archival work. TANZPLAN DEUTSCHLAND considers itself to be an initiating strategy for dance with the aim of comprehensively and systematically strengthening the art form of dance. In addition to a network of on-­ site dance centres in Berlin, Hamburg and Essen, initial networking platforms and archives on dance media have been established online, and research projects using the approaches of art research and research in practice have been realised. (cf. Sect. 1.2.2 on the transmission and safeguarding of dance heritage in the present) In addition, TANZPLAN DEUTSCHLAND developed concepts for comprehensive archive work during the project. In addition to collections of material, networks, and exhibitions, this resulted in further projects that deal with the concrete dance heritage both through empractical research (an example of this is the research project Tanztechniken 2010) and through dance in a creative way (an example of this is the exhibition project The century of Dance (Das Jahrhundert des Tanzes)). Both projects are presented in the following section. Furthermore, within the framework of TANZPLAN DEUTSCHLAND, a comprehensive series of publications on the state of dance research in Germany and with a look at research conducted in Switzerland, France and the USA was realised for the first time. As a follow-up to TANZPLAN  As part of a similar project in the German dance area, two supporting associations of the Modern Dance were enables by means of a subsidy of KULTUR.GEMEINSCHAFTEN in the years 2021/22 to produce digital podcasts and a documentary with the aim to be documented the Chladek-Tecnique. Beyond that, with regard to the 50th annuary of the IGRC, oral history podcasts with the generation of master students of Rosalia Chladek are planned. The edition of named works is still pending in the moment of this publication. 5

122

4  Performative Methods as an Approach to Dance Practice

DEUTSCHLAND, TANZFONDS ERBE provides a framework for artistic projects on the cultural heritage of dance. In the period from 2012 to 2019, 60 projects were funded that dealt with the significance of dance heritage in the present in a wide variety of ways. Formats include exhibitions, publications, performances, new studies, re-creations, online projects, films, installations, concerts, lecture performances, re-enactment, reconstruction, symposia, and documentaries. The crucial point of departure with regard to the concern of the Living Archives is that the pieces performed were developed in engagement with a dance artist of the performer’s own choosing from the dance heritage of the twentieth century. The artistic results of these processes gave the audience access to a living history of dance that had previously been the preserve of only a few experts. The most important finding of the Fund’s work is formulated in the fact that “the history of dance in its present form does not come across dogmatically, there is no fixed form, no fixed specification as to how the historical re-enactment is to take place or what counts as such at all” (Ritter/Cramer in Odenthal, 2019, p. 258). In this way, it fits into the discourse of dance studies and the performative approach of living dance archives. Special mention should be made of the TANZFONDS ERBE project ‘Past Present Future’ at this point. It was the first major project of the association Villa Wigman für TANZ e.V. in Dresden. The initiative of the independent dance scene and other supporters has been trying to preserve the former workplace of the dancer and choreographer Mary Wigman for several years. The three-part project marks an important step on the way to preserving the school building in Dresden: as a cultural-­ historical site as well as a rehearsal, production and teaching centre for contemporary dance and other independent performing arts. At the place where Mary Wigman worked and lived for many years, the project takes her artistic and pedagogical positions as a starting point for a transformation into current working methods of today’s dance practitioners. The project uses practical dance approaches, documenting, scientific and artistic forms of access and realisation. The aim is to address a broader public and to give the former Wigman School in Dresden a new visibility (cf. online at https://www.villa-­wigman.de). 4.3.2.6 Dance Archive as Exhibition: Performance, Documentation, Reconstruction The project Dance Techniques 2010 represents a comprehensive archive of research results, documents, interviews, descriptions, and video documentations of teaching and training methods for dance techniques from the dance heritage of Modern Expressive Dance as well as of contemporary dance practices based on modern dance and postmodern dance. For this purpose, dance and training techniques are recorded as they are taught at seven locations or rather dance academies. It uses a complex recording procedure on several theoretical and practical levels based on text documents, sources, observation, video recordings, analyses of questionnaires,

4.3  Safeguarding and Transmission of Dance Knowledge

123

and interviews. The archive is constituted through the publication, which includes methodology, theoretical approaches, selected material from the research process and systematic video recordings. The seven sites or techniques selected according to criteria are the Humphrey/Limón tradition at the Palucca-Schule Dresden, the counter technique at the Rotterdam Dance Academy, the Jooss-Leeder technique at Laban London, the Cunningham technique at the Institute of Dance Arts Linz, the Minding Motion at the Zentrum Tanz as a pilot project of TANZPLAN DEUTSCHLAND, the Muller technique at the Centre for Contemporary Dance (Zentrum für Zeitgenössischen Tanz) in Cologne, and finally techniques oriented towards release and alignment at the Frankfurt University of Music and Performing Arts (HS für Musik und Darstellende Künste in Frankfurt) (cf. in Diehl & Lampert, 2011). It is from this context that the exhibition project The Century of Dance developed through a combination and merging of approaches from documentation, performance, and reconstruction. Contemporary dancers and choreographers draw from an incredibly rich and powerful modern history that more or less spans the twentieth century. They all form the Century of Dance, to which the Academy of Arts is dedicating an exhibition, a festival, an international campus and a publication. For the first time, the dance archives of Cologne, Leipzig, Bremen, and Berlin are presenting unique materials from their collections in a joint exhibition. Selected documents of German modern dance are placed in the context of a worldwide, international dance scene, which enters into a dialogue with the original objects through projections of one hundred iconic photographs and film clips as a dynamic presentation of body images and inventions of movement. In the series of events at the Academy of Arts (Akademie der Künste), the legacy of expressive dance, as well as that of present dancers, choreographers, and performers, is presented as contemporary art. The exhibition and performance project is documented in the reader The Century of Dance (Odenthal, 2019). (Available at Academy of the Arts (2019): What the body remembers. On the topicality of dance. Online: https://www.adk.de/de/projekte/2019/tanzerbe/). There is another exhibition project on Pina Bausch’s work in dance that should not go unmentioned. Behind the art is the name of the exhibition at the Bundeskunsthalle in 2016, which brings together various media formats used to document Pina Bausch’s life and work, as well as interviews and narratives, reconstructions of training rooms and rehearsal situations, and dance practice performed by dancers from Pina Bausch’s company. (Available at Bundeskunsthalle Bonn (2016): Behind the art. Pina Bausch and the Dance Theatre. Online: https://www. bundeskunsthalle.de/ mediathek.html#c21493) A comprehensive, multi-­ layered and, above all, experienceable (in the sense of an empractical experience) approach to the processes of choreographic and dance work is created. The exhibition concept is an almost archetypal example for a possible implementation as a performative dance archive.

124

4  Performative Methods as an Approach to Dance Practice

4.3.2.7 Dance Archive as Media Documentation Finally, the online formats can be named as forms of documentation. Even if they only use the format of conventional digital media, they offer a very open and extensive access for a broad group of users to find and use material in the most diverse ways for documentation, research or creative purposes. In addition, it is a valuable tool for networking among individuals, projects, and making information or material available and thus pave the way for future projects. This provides the opportunity to keep dance heritage alive within a limited framework by safeguarding and transmitting it. It is for one the institutional dance archives of the individual countries (the German dance archives in Cologne and Leipzig, the SAPA and PANCH foundations in Switzerland, SARMA in the Netherlands and SIOB in England) that offer online platforms for their documentation and research projects. On the other hand, there are thematic or artist-oriented platforms, such as those of William Forsythe and the Pina Bausch Company, which make text, photo and video material available to the public. Networking platforms and online communities such as tanznetz.de in Germany also form a kind of media archive. These are mostly online communities of dance professionals such as critics, photographers, filmmakers, etc., who contribute to these portals on a voluntary basis. Finally, streaming and video portals, such as YouTube, Vimeo, etc., also form a kind of accumulation of material. To what extent these can be considered part of an archive still needs to assessed and discussed.

References Bibliography Alkemeyer, T., Brümmer, K., Kodalle, R., & Pille, T. (Eds.). (2009). Ordnung in Bewegung. Choreographien des Sozialen. Körper in Sport, Tanz, Arbeit und Bildung. transcript. Assmann, A., & Harth, D. (Eds.). (1991). Kultur als Lebenswelt und Monument. Fischer. Assmann, A., & Harth, D. (Eds.). (1993). Mnemosyne. Formen und Funktionen der kulturellen Erinnerung. Fischer. Barthel, G. (2017). Choreografische Praxis. Vermittlung in Tanzkunst und Kultureller Bildung. transcript. Bischof, M., & Lampert, F. (Eds.). (2020). Sinn und Sinne im Tanz. Perspektiven aus Kunst und Wissenschaft (Jahrbuch Tanzforschung Bd. 30). transcript. Bischof, M., & Rosiny, C. (Eds.). (2010). Konzepte der Tanzkultur. Wissen und Wege der Tanzforschung. transcript. Bischof, M., Feest, C., & Rosiny, C. (Eds.). (2006). e_motion (Jahrbuch Tanzforschung Bd. 16). LIT. Brandstetter, G., & Klein, G. (Eds.). (2006). Bewegung in Übertragung. Methodische Überlegungen am Beispiel von Le Sacre du Printemps. transcript. Brandstetter, G., & Klein, G. (Eds.). (2015). Methoden der Tanzwissenschaft. Modellanalysen zu Pina Bauschs »Le Sacre du Printemps/Das Frühlingsopfer«. transcript. Brandstetter, G., & Wulf, C. (Eds.). (2007). Tanz als Anthropologie. Fink.

References

125

Carter, A. (Ed.). (2006). The Routledge dance studies reader. Routledge. Desmond, J. C. (1993–1994): Embodying difference: Issues in dance and cultural studies. Cultural Critique, 26, 33–63. Desmond, J.  C. (Ed.). (20064). Meaning in motion. New cultural studies of dance. Duke University Press. Diehl, I., & Lampert, F. (Eds.). (2011). Tanztechniken 2010 – Tanzplan Deutschland. Henschel. Fischer, M., & Alarcón, M. (Eds.). (2006). Philosophie des Tanzes. Denkfestival  – eine interdisziplinäre Reflexion des Tanzes. fwpf. Fischer-Lichte, E. (20163). Performativität. Eine Einführung. transcript. Freire, P. (2008). Pädagogik der Autonomie. Notwendiges Wissen für die Bildungspraxis. Waxmann. (Sao Paolo 1996). Fritsch, U. (19992). Tanz. Bewegungskultur, Gesellschaft: Verluste und Chancen im Bereich expressiven Bewegens. Afra. Galak, E. (2010). El concepto cuerpo en Pierre Bourdieu: Un análisis de sus usus, sus límites y sus potencialidades. Tesis de postgrado, Universidad Nacional de la Plata. Online: http://www. memoria.fahce.unlp.edu.ar/tesis/te.453/te.453pdf. Last access: 27 Jan 2021. Gehm, S., Husemann, P., & von Wilcke, K. (Eds.). (2007). Wissen in Bewegung. Perspektiven der künstlerischen und wissenschaftlichen Forschung im Tanz. transcript. Gugutzer, R. (2004). Soziologie des Körpers. transcript. Gutiérrez, A. B. (2004). Poder, hábitus y representaciones: recorrido por el concepto de violencia simbólica en Pierre Bourdieu. Revista Complutense de Educación, 1(15), 289–300. Hahn, K., & Meuser, M. (2002). Körperrepräsentationen. Die Ordnung des Sozialen und der Körper. UVK. Hanna, J.  L. (1987). To dance is human. A theory of nonverbal communication. University of Chicago Press. Huschka, S. (Ed.). (2009). Wissenskultur Tanz. Historische und zeitgenössische Vermittlungsakte zwischen Praktiken und Diskursen. transcript. Illich, I. (2003). Entschulung der Gesellschaft. Eine Streitschrift. Beck. Klein, G. (Ed.). (2004). Bewegung. Sozial- und kulturwissenschaftliche Konzepte. transcript. Klein, G. (Ed.). (2009). Tango in translation. Tanz zwischen Medien, Kulturen, Kunst und Politik. transcript. Klein, G. (2019a). Pina Bausch und das Tanztheater. Die Kunst des Übersetzens. transcript. Klein, G. (Ed.). (2019b2). Choreografischer Baukasten. Das Buch. transcript. Klein, G., & Zipprich, C. (Eds.). (2002). Tanz. Theory. Text (Jahrbuch Tanzforschung Bd.12). LIT. Lepecki, A. (2006). Option Tanz. Performance und die Politik der Bewegung. Theater der Zeit (Routledge 2006). Liska, M.  M. (2009). El tango como disciplinador de cuerpos ilegítimos-legitimados. TRANS revista transcultural de música (13). Louppé, L. (2009). Poetik des zeitgenössischen Tanzes. transcript. McFee, G. (1992). Understanding dance. Routledge. Odenthal, J. (2019). Das Jahrhundert des Tanzes. Ein Reader. Alexander Verlag. Oppholzer, U. (2010). Bewegte Schüler lernen leichter. Ein Bewegungskonzept für die Primarstufe, Sekundarstufe I und II. borgmann Publishing. Online: https://d-­nb.info/968533817/04. Last access: 27 Jan 2021. Parviainen, J. (2002). Bodily knowledge: Epistemological reflections on dance. Dance Research Journal, 1(34), 11–26. Pelinski, R. (Ed.). (2000/1995). El tango nómade. Sobre la diáspora del tango (pp.  27–70). Corregidor. Polti, V. (2010). Las formas contemporáneas del tango. Entremúsicas. Música, investigación y docencia. Online: http://www. entremusicas.com/investigacion/2010/12/06/las-­formas-­ contemporaneos-­del-­tango/. Last access: 27 Jan 2021. Pusnik, M. (2010). Introduction. Dance as social life and cultural practice. Anthropological Notebooks, 16(3), 5–8.

126

4  Performative Methods as an Approach to Dance Practice

Quinten, S., & Schroedter, S. (Eds.). (2016). Tanzpraxis in der Forschung  – Tanz als Forschungspraxis. Choreographie – Improvisation – Exploration. transcript. Reed, S. A. (1998). The politics and poetics of dance. Annual Review of Anthropology, 27, 503–532. Roscher, M. (2003). Bewegung und Gestaltung. Vom bewussten Üben zum freien Bewegen. Institut für bewegungswissenschaftliche Anthropologie e.V. Steiner, R. (19802). Eurythmie, die Offenbarung der sprechenden Seele: Eine Fortbildung der Goetheschen Metamorphosenanschauung im Bereich der menschlichen Bewegung. In Eurythmie, Werke in der Rudolf-Steiner-Gesamtausgabe (Bd.1). Rudolf-Steiner-Verlag (photomechan. reprint) Thurner, C. (2009). Beredte Körper – bewegte Seelen. Zum Diskurs der doppelten Bewegung in Tanztexten. transcript. Vester, F. (1975). Denken, Lernen, Vergessen. Was geht in unserem Kopf vor, wie lernt das Gehirn, und wann läßt es uns im Stich? Deutscher Taschenbuchverlag. Wulf, C. (2006). Anthropologie kultureller Vielfalt. Interkulturelle Bildung in Zeiten der Globalisierung. transcript.

Video Footage Bundeskunsthalle Bonn. (2016). Behind the art. Pina Bausch and the Dance Theatre. Online: https://www.bundeskunsthalle.de/mediathek.html#c21493. Last access: 27 Jan 2021. DanceLab Berlin. (2016). El circulo eterno. Homage to Harald Kreutzberg. Online: https://www. youtube.com/watch?v=xmx-­mLEuQXA. Last access: 27 Jan 2021. ECHOonline. (2016). Triadic ballet at the Staatstheater Darmstadt. Online: https://www.youtube. com/watch?v=eUobt_t9LZ0. Last access: 27 Jan 2021.

Chapter 5

The Living Heritage of Dance: Dance Archives in Practice

5.1 Dance Archives as an Approach to Dance Practices – Performative and Empractical […] to recognise: that art is itself a form of research; and that, conversely, science is an art. Gabriele Brandstetter in Odenthal: The Century of Dance, p. 294

In the previous chapter, concepts for archives of dance practice were presented that use different approaches and various media or media structures. The range of the approaches presented has already proven to be relatively comprehensive, starting with extensive collection work, moving on to the integration of empractical components and finally arriving at approaches of research in practice. Therefore, a well-­ developed basis for further reflections on the Living Archives in regard to the dance heritage could already be established. In addition to developing the existing ideas further, it is above all a matter of testing these concepts for archiving in practice. This chapter is therefore dedicated to an approach to archiving that is being tested and further developed in an ongoing series of university seminars. This is the Performative Dance Archive. It is an approach of the new methodology that was proposed in the first chapter and that aims at experiencing, grasping and communicating dance practices and the specifics of dance knowledge. The conception and the performative work carried out in the Dance Archive as part of the practical testing builds on the argumentations in the discourse of dance studies outlined in Chap. 4 and develops them further with regard to their practical application. Following the theoretical determination of the knowledge associated with dance, three complex areas of knowledge were identified in the previous chapter. In the approach of describing, a systematic knowledge of dance styles, dance genesis and the specificity of dance forms is formulated; furthermore, the circulating discursive knowledge is part of this and generates a structural knowledge of the embodiment of the social and political in dance situations; finally, only one’s own body-­ mechanical, sensory and emotional experience completes the spectrum of © The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2023 V. Kämpfe, Dance Practices as Research, Heritage Studies, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-30581-8_5

127

128

5  The Living Heritage of Dance: Dance Archives in Practice

knowledge and is identified as an implicit knowledge. In order to grasp these complex areas of knowledge, theoretical and analytical as well as empractical approaches are required. This spectrum of access levels is integrated and brought together in the Performative Dance Archive. The archive thus works from a descriptive and analytical perspective on dance practices as well as on an empractical level in dance practice. On the one hand, the conventional practices of collecting, analysing, and discussing documents, discourses, and artefacts are used; on the other hand, one works with one’s own dance practice and reflects on it. The term performative was chosen to describe the dance archive because it can be used to adequately describe dance situations. In the preceding argumentations (cf. Sects. 2.1, 3.1, and 4.1), it was established that performative situations, like dance situations, are characterised by knowledge through or in movements that is body-bound and located in space and time. Furthermore, it is always associated with processes and subject to constant change. If one takes this as a given, only an empractical approach gives access to performative situations. Accordingly, the Performative Dance Archive focuses on a theoretical and practical level on the way in which such knowledge can be experienced and is available as knowledge; but also, on the special characteristics that dance practices exhibit. The focus of the performative approach is on the development as well as the bodily performance of dance practices. Within the framework of this research in practice, the question of knowledge formation based on empractical experience then arises. On the one hand, this concerns the verbalisation or transmission necessary for scientific usability, and on the other hand, speaking about dance ultimately demands its definition. Consequently, both aspects should be approached from the empractical experience. On the one hand, existing theoretical definitions can be taken as a starting point; on the other hand, they can be questioned and modified through the insights gained from empractical experience. With respect to generating knowledge, it becomes apparent in this context to what extent forms of expression and knowledge in movement or in dance can work as a matrix for reflection. At the same time, this makes it possible to formulate an ‘added value’ based on the empractical experience. The reflection on the work in the dance archive should also take into account which processes of institutionalisation can be identified in the methodological approach to dance practices alone. For the conception of the way of working as well as the selection of thematic aspects and methodological tools are always linked to the existing external conditions of the institutional and infrastructural setting. In this context, it is particularly important to see what impact the research design using an empractical approach could have on dance practices. In this constant interrelation between the theoretical foundation, the reflection of the practical research as well as the transformation of the concepts and methods, the approaches relevant to the research and modes of cognition to be determined continue to develop. Furthermore, empractical experience is understood as performative acting and is thus at the same time a form of archival work for its safeguarding and transmission in the sense of a living dance heritage. Accordingly, with regard to

5.2 The Performative Dance Archive – Research in Practice

129

the conceptualisation and discussion of the possibilities of developing and communicating a living dance heritage in the present, the Performative Dance Archive will be presented in more detail in its implementation in the context of a university seminar in the following section.

5.2 The Performative Dance Archive – Research in Practice Thus, it becomes clear that the presence of dance reality and the dialogical principle it contains, the principle of simultaneity and participation, required analogue memory spaces even in the age of the perpetual presence of the digital. Ritter/Cramer in Odenthal: The Century of Dance, p. 266

The conceptual and methodological structures of a Performative Dance Archive outlined above could be explored and developed further together with students in the format of a university seminar over the course of several semesters. The seminar belonged to the complementary courses.1 It is compulsory for all students to take a complementary class in addition to their major and minor. Complementary studies aim to introduce students to a broader spectrum of scientific subject areas and methodological approaches without being limited to the paradigms of their own subject. Methodological emphases are directed towards the developments of practical relevance, transdisciplinarity, and digital media that are currently guiding research. The special characteristic of these seminars is that students of different semesters and fields of study with very different experiences in terms of content and methods come together. This holds the potential to find new ways of gaining knowledge and imparting knowledge out of the encounter and engagement with these differences. Therefore, the setting of a complementary seminar proves to be predestined for the work on the Performative Dance Archive.

5.2.1 Theoretical Perspectives of Access In accordance with the aforementioned conceptual provisions for the Performative Dance Archive, the students first deal with the various subject areas within the framework of the existing research discourse by means of conventional scientific approaches. This included the elaboration of theoretical concepts and methodological approaches to knowledge (concepts of knowledge in general, implicit forms of  Since the summer semester 2018 the seminars have been held as ongoing seminars or as block seminars, each with a different focus, in presence and as online seminars at Leuphana University of Lüneburg. The concept of the complementary courses can be viewed online at https://www. leuphana.de/college/studium/ks.html 1

130

5  The Living Heritage of Dance: Dance Archives in Practice

knowledge and, in particular, body knowledge and dance knowledge), to corporeality and concepts of the body, to movement and its social implications, to the specificity of dance and dance practice, to concepts of archiving as well as to possibilities of notation and options for transmission and teaching. The decision in favour of such a conventional introduction is owed to the seminar setting as a complementary course; since students usually come into contact with the field of dance studies for the first time and, from experience, are usually overwhelmed by a practical introduction. Various movement and dance practices were explored more in-­depth, using text, image and video materials. On this level, the focus is on the one hand on the description of what was perceived, and on the other hand on the analysis of this media-based transmission in the form of discourse, image and video analysis. Ideally, there would be a way to include dance recitals and performances in order to also change spatial situations and to experience the moment of dance as well as the dance work as part of a creative dance process in presence. However, this was not possible within the time and the financial means available during the seminars.

5.2.2 Empractical Experience Beyond these traditional approaches on a theoretical and analytical level, dance practice was experienced through the actual practice with the own body. This means first of all the concrete dance practices, in that professional dancers teach dance techniques in training sessions. A variety of dance forms from the canon of dance-­ historical development was selected for this purpose, as this provides a familiar structure for the students. Beginning with courtly dance, a characteristic stylisation and strict standardisation of dance as an aesthetic and meaningful form of movement was established for the first time. These standardisations and the emergence of fixed choreographies required the first dance notations. This led to the development of ballet in classical dance. This dance form was tried out in a subsequent training session. A typical dance technique as well as dance expression, and specific forms of movement and use of body mechanics developed. Discipline and standardisation proved to be fundamental characterisations. In the transformation to modern dance and jazz, concrete socio-cultural and individual situations found their expression. While these dance techniques were in principle still strongly rooted in the movement techniques of classical dance, they led, by means of the technique of improvisation and freer choreographies, to discontinuities, new ways of moving and perspectives in the present. These aspects could easily be experienced in the dance practice. Last but not least, dance and movement styles specific to certain local and socio-cultural settings should be included in the selection. They are also an expression of a concrete socio-cultural situation of people or social groups. In their development they are closely linked to local conditions and individual, traditional or urban influences. Other suitable options for practical dance experience during the seminar were forms of couple dance that are common in society, popular dance forms or dance forms that do not generally belong to one’s own culture. Despite the

5.2 The Performative Dance Archive – Research in Practice

131

overall historical structure of the seminar, it proved to be very constructive and stimulating to begin the dance practice with a movement improvisation or Contact Improvisation. In reflecting on these first experiences, the students formulated impressions that they were able to identify and name as the specific aspects of movement and dance knowledge over the course of the seminar. This proved to be helpful in order to understand and make sense of the theoretical categories in the reflection of the following training sessions of other movement techniques. For each practice session, questions served as reminders and reflection prompts. The content of these reflection sheets can be summarised in the following way: • Do you remember movement phrases? Can you describe them, write them down or demonstrate them? • Were you able to move freely or create movement freely? • Did you realise at the moment of movement or afterwards that you were using familiar or completely new patterns of movement? What were problematic moments? • In what ways would other spatial and general material conditions have an influence? • Are spaces of free movement creation sufficient for the safeguarding and transmission of dance, dance practices and the specific dance knowledge? Which aspects are not taken into account? • To what extent is it already movement material worthy of archiving? On the one hand, these reflection worksheets are a didactic element to give the students a possibility to reflect in a way that is familiar to them. At the same time, however, they force them to confront the fundamental problem of translating experienced movement knowledge as well as sensory and kinaesthetic impressions into language. Confronted with this difficulty, some students developed additional forms of expression. These are discussed in the section on artistic research approaches below.

5.2.3 Reconstruction Work In addition to the dance techniques taught in the training sessions, dancing short sequences from choreographed dance works proved to be experiential and enlightening. Almost immediately it became obvious to the students that they could not reproduce an acceptable version of the choreographed sequence by attempting to copy dance movements they had only seen. With this approach, they were unable to grasp the choreographic situation, the movement sequences, and most importantly, the movement technique in order to perform them with their own bodies. Out of this experience, the students became aware that the reconstruction of dance works does not merely mean imitating or copying movements as faithfully as possible, but is above all an analytical, experimental as well as artistic work. Following the methodological procedure developed in the research project published in Tanztechniken 2010 (Diehl & Lampert, 2011; for a brief description of the research project see

132

5  The Living Heritage of Dance: Dance Archives in Practice

Sect. 4.3.2), it was possible to develop useful categories in the seminar for analysing the choreographic sequences to be reconstructed. These proved to be useful when applied in practice: • the social and dance context or the so-called zeitgeist in which the choreographic scene was created; • the concrete movements and choreographic techniques used; • the necessary bodywork resulting from a specific training (this allowed for making the compromise of not being able to perform certain movement sequences in the context of the seminar); • the perceptible sensations and moods; • the intention or purpose behind the choreographic dance work; • any potential technical equipment and materials required for the development or realisation of the dance situation; • an enabling infrastructure as well as funding for the development, conception, training, and performance of the choreographic work (not a relevant category in the context of the seminar, as it was not intended to rehearse or perform a dance piece on a larger scale). In order to start such a reconstruction work, access to archival material, documentations, and recordings is required. Furthermore, the roles and functions of all dancers and choreographers, both of the original dance scene and of those involved in the reconstruction process, as well as of the audience, technicians, etc., should be reflected upon. In the course of the reconstruction work in the seminar, it also became clear that a preserving form of safeguarding of the past cannot be achieved. On the other hand, the students confirmed that the concrete reconstruction of a piece is a learning, appropriating dance practice. They thus confirm positions from the research discourse. They argue that the reconstruction work enables both dancers and choreographers on the one hand to continue to have certain movement techniques at their disposal, and on the other hand that they function as so-called tools for creativity to advance their own choreographic work (cf. the introductory text in Fleischle-Braun et al., 2017, pp. 7–30). In order to implement the developed categories for the reconstruction work, a feasible method of movement analysis is required. Video recordings of choreographies that are recorded with the help of such a method and developed in dance practice are easy to handle in the seminar context. Rudolf von Laban (1879–1958), as a dancer, theorist, and leading representative of expressive dance, developed a comprehensive movement analysis based on his kinetography (usually referred to as Labanotation; cf. Sect. 3.2.2). In the seminar it was especially fitting to use this one, as it is part of the dance heritage of Modern Expressive Dance. In the following section, the movement analyses will be outlined with respect to those aspects that can be applied in the limited context of the seminar.

5.2 The Performative Dance Archive – Research in Practice

133

5.2.4 Movement Analysis According to Laban If kinetography is used to record choreographed or reconstructed dances in dance notation, movement analysis serves as a method to analyse individual movements up to choreographic works based on the documentation. In the breakdown of movements by means of the parameters developed, movements can be observed, recorded, notated, reflected upon, and remembered. In addition, they are also used in contemporary dance practice as a choreographic tool to generate, form, vary, define, and compose movements. Thus, movement analysis functions on the one hand as an observation and analysis tool, and on the other hand as a creative impulse for dance development and choreographic work. Laban’s movement analysis was further developed and expanded in the Laban/Bartenieff Movement Studies (LBBS) or Laban Movement Analysis (LMA), which were developed by his student Irmgard Bartenieff. They are still used today not only in the field of dance and choreography, but also in theatre work, in sports and movement analysis as well as in therapeutic procedures, for example in dance therapy, psychotherapy or physiotherapy (cf. individual contributions in Fleischle-Braun et al., 2017). Laban’s movement analysis is based on four movement parameters by which movement is determined. Under the parameter BODY, individual body parts and body actions are observed that initiate or lead movements. The basic assumption is that only the understanding of the movements of individual body parts and their relationship to each other creates the prerequisite for the recognition of movement sequences. Through observation, body concepts of the movement techniques used, bodily preferences in the movements and the organisation of the body actions can be deciphered. The parameter SPACE is about the description of movement in relation to space. For this purpose, space is structured in one, two and three dimensions, in a similar way to architecture. Furthermore, the space surrounding the body – the kinesphere  – is described as the space that the limbs can circumscribe: the near kinesphere is the area of movement directly around the body, the middle kinesphere is the area from the bent elbow to the fingertips, the large kinesphere is the area with the arms fully extended. From this structure Laban develops a space surrounding the body along a body model consisting of twenty triangles  – the icosahedron. The kinesphere is related to the icosahedron by means of a distribution of points, axes, and levels in space (a concise summary can be found in the leporello for the Laban movement analysis in Klein et al.: Choreografischer Baukasten 2011). The movement sequences are oriented within this geometric structure and can be recorded and described accordingly (Fig. 5.1). The third parameter, EFFORT, makes it possible to perceive and name the quality of movement. Laban understands effort as the dynamics of the relationship of movement in space. Every movement can be described by eight elements of effort, which are formed by a binary opposition pair – the indulging and the fighting element – and four effort factors.

134

5  The Living Heritage of Dance: Dance Archives in Practice SPACE LEVELS

MOVEMENT on AXIS

upper_ over the stand

in one axis vertical/horizontal

middle_ at rest

in two axes levels

in three axes three-dimensional

lower_ on the ground

Fig. 5.1  Room levels and movement axes according to Laban. (Source: http://le-­corpus.com/atlas/ atlas-­space-­trace.html (last access: 27.01.2021))

Effort factors Power/weight Space Time Flow

Fighting element Strong/heavy Direct Sudden Bound

Indulging element Light Indirect Delayed Free

The factor time distinguishes a sudden or slowly and delayed acceleration, the factor space means a direct or an indirect execution of movement from A to B, the factor power/weight characterises a strong, active use of body strength or little use of weight, against gravity or following gravity, the factor flow of movement includes a bound and guided or unbound and free movement. This results in eight elementary actions: pushing (strong, direct, delayed), wringing (strong, indirect, delayed), fluttering (light, indirect, sudden), dabbing (light, direct, sudden), punching (strong, direct, sudden), whipping (strong, indirect, sudden), floating (light, indirect, delayed), gliding (light, direct, delayed) (Summary in the leporello for Laban movement analysis in Klein et al.: Choreografischer Baukasten 2011). It should be noted that these terms appear strikingly often in descriptions of dance movement, without it being clear where they come from. In addition to these three predominantly used parameters, Laban formulates another one. The movement parameter SHAPE describes the process of changing the shape of the body in space. The shape changes with every movement. The change of shape can refer to one’s own body or to the environment, or it can mean an adaptation to another body, for example a person, an object or material. The quality of shape refers to the expression of the movement and describes the spatial direction of the change in shape (rising – sinking, spreading – closing, striving forward – retreating). In the further development of Laban’s movement analysis by Bartenieff, two additional parameters were added. The parameter PHRASING replaces the two concepts of rhythm or metre used by Laban. It denotes the relationship of the four

5.2 The Performative Dance Archive – Research in Practice

135

movement parameters body, space, effort and form in the course of the movement, movement phrase, or movement sequence. Phrasing is used to identify the characteristic of the movement. It refers to one or more of these four movement parameters. The temporal arrangement of the movement sequence in the body can be simultaneous (simultaneously performed movements of several body parts), successive (consecutive movements performed by adjacent body parts) and sequential (sequence of movements of non-adjacent body parts). A phrase can be performed without special emphasis or with initial, middle, or final emphasis. Finally, the parameter RELATIONSHIP focuses on the relationship of individual body parts to each other or of the moving person/s to other persons (participants or audience), to objects, material, media. These relationships can be characterised by distance (attention/disinterest, spatial orientation, gradation of distance up to touching), duration (short-lived, temporary, sustained) and type of contact (active – passive, lead – follow) (cf. Klein et al., 2011, Leporello). In addition to the movement analysis according to Laban as a possible method of analysis, three other decisive factors for reconstruction are named in the literature. First and foremost, this is the dancer with the body technique he or she appropriated and incorporated, the previous motor skill and aesthetic training, with his or her personality as well as with his or her previous knowledge of style, technique, and way of dancing. Furthermore, the aspect of awareness of what is to be danced or the feeling for what is to be danced comes into play as an essential part of the reconstruction process. An example of such a work of building awareness and working with the feelings of the dancers is the approach of the dancer and choreographer Pina Bausch. By asking her dancers questions, she drew on their perceptions, associations, thoughts, personal backgrounds, and sensitivities in verbal or danced form during the choreographic process (Gehm et al., 2007, p. 117). This shifts the choreographic dance work towards a conscious inclusion of the subjectivity of each individual participant. Furthermore, the danger of re-interpretation from the present or personal context is formulated, but at the same time undergoes a re-evaluation as an option for creative work in re-interpretation. To illustrate this, once again a brief insight into the Starting Point project at Folkwang University is given. The project was implemented in the run-up to the Biennale Tanzausbildung Köln ‘Reflexion und Feedback’ (Biennale Dance Education Cologne ‘Reflection and Feedback’) in spring 2016. The Biennale was concerned with looking at research and feedback processes in artistic contexts. The Folkwang Dance Department decided to use the method of Kinetography Laban, which it had further developed. In the Folkwang Dance Department’s understanding, this notation system is not primarily a documentation of movement sequences and choreographies, but rather provides a sound theoretical basis for movement analysis. The starting point for the project was the score of an etude by Jean Cébron notated in Kinetographie Laban. A special feature of Cébron’s teaching was that he wrote his own movement compositions – so-called etudes – which took up a theme from the movement theory of the Jooss-Leeder method and processed it in terms of motifs. The score of one of these etudes, entitled Starting Point, had been written in earlier years as a final project by a student there. The intention of the project was to

136

5  The Living Heritage of Dance: Dance Archives in Practice

rehearse the etude with the students and perform it at the Biennale. The dancers were therefore given the task of interpreting the labanotation and implementing the choreography in dance (Brinkmann/Drewes in Quinten & Schroedter, 2016, pp.  73–76 and for further elaboration ibid., pp.  76–S.83). The performers reconstructed the piece in the awareness that the original choreography would not be recreated one-to-one. Accordingly, an important part of the work was actually coming up with an own composition and creative variation of the piece. These were then additionally part of the presentation of the re-construction. Claudia Jeschke, who also took part in the project, emphasises: “Notation should not only be used as documentation, but should be understood creatively. The expertise behind it is to be taken as information and not as a documentation skill” (ibid., p. 80). In the context of this project, this also meant understanding dance practice as research, “reflecting on one’s own art practice, documenting it and making the results of this research available to a public” (ibid., p. 73). The gain from a scientific perspective lies in new and novel insights as well as knowledge that can now be determined. The gain from an artistic perspective on dance can also lie in the expansion of one’s own movement repertoire, artistic ideas of dance, and conceptual work.

5.2.5 Research in Practice and Artistic Research As part of the Performative Dance Archives, students reconstructed a labanotation as an independent performance, first in the mode of a theoretic concept and later performing it in dance. In their comparative movement analysis, the students explored the question of whether labanotation/kinetography actually allows for dances to be reconstructed in their original way and to what extent this can have a scientific value. Similar to the Starting Point project, the students had to read the choreography depicted and dance it themselves.2 This process was carried out independently by two students, each of whom recorded it on video. The aim was to on the one hand try out the labanotation, and on the other hand to reflect on how much room for interpretation it allows for. After the implementation in practice, the first step was to look at the two dances using the Laban movement analysis. Based on this, the two variations of the score were interpreted and compared. With the application of this analysis to the self-developed dance, it, or rather the two dances could be better compared. The result of the two implementations of the Labanotation were video recordings of approximately one minute. As a conclusion from the movement analysis and the comparison of the two dances, it could be concluded that the basic structure of both dances is the same, but that there are many variations in the  As part of the project, the participants had to decipher the score and try to reconstruct the dance. It must be added here, however, that the dancers were also helped in the reconstruction by video recordings of the choreography at the time. Afterwards, the practical dance rehearsal of the piece took place. The result was a four-minute etude, which was performed at the Biennale (Brinkmann/ Drewes in Quinten & Schroedter, 2016, p. 82). 2

5.2 The Performative Dance Archive – Research in Practice

137

individual movements. For example, since the kinetogram only specifies the movement of one part of the body at some points, the dancers were free to choose in which form this movement should be performed. As in the Starting Point project, variations can therefore also be found in this implementation – depending on how detailed the kinetogram is. It was observed that with this method it is almost impossible to reconstruct dances one-to-one in order to transmit them to future generations in their original form. In this respect, the new media, which are increasingly being incorporated into dance notation, will change more than is currently assumed. Through the exact transmission of the movement sequences, one’s own creative processes will possibly become obsolete. Through the free creativity allowed in dance notations such as kinetography, the choreographies are not only written down and thus made reproducible, they also contain the potential for a lived transmission that corresponds to the spirit of the time (The corresponding seminar paper is available from the author). At this point, space is given to another student paper in the field of artistic research or research in practice. This may illustrate the basic idea of artistic research. The student worked on the topic ‘Poetry in Science’. The idea of her work was to deepen and expand the knowledge generated by her own dance experiences by writing poems. The basis for this were, on the one hand, spontaneous reactions arising in the dance situation and, on the other hand, her self-reflection after the training sessions. Furthermore, according to the students’ approach, the poems could also generate other forms of knowledge in the reader and further serve to pass on specific implicit knowledge. The work is understood as an experimentation of this method through its application. Accordingly, the central question was: To what extent does poetry as a methodical approach lead to the generation of knowledge or the deepening of knowledge already gained by the person writing the poem? The student describes her approach in the following way: “The experiences within dance practice were made in the context of the aforementioned seminar. The different dance styles were: Five Rhythms teaching by Gabrielle Roth, court dances, the Alexander Technique, classical dance, jazz dance, an attempted reconstruction of Isadora Duncan’s dances using the Laban method, and capoeira. The process of writing the poem itself happened in varying proportions during and immediately after the dance experience, depending on my own feelings and inspiration. During the dance experience, pen and paper were available at all times to record sensations and impressions as well as verses and stanzas that came directly ‘to mind’. Immediately after dancing, the poem was completed if necessary.” As a conclusion from applying the approach, the student formulated: “After my own application of poetry in research I can confirm that poetry as artistic research can lead to the generation of knowledge. Just by the intention to write a poem out of the dance experiences, I was much more aware of the situation, the atmosphere and my body and paid more attention to my senses. As a result, I felt I was generating much more embodied knowledge than if I had made the dance experiences without this intention. In writing the poems after the dance experience, I noticed how much I started to reflect. This does not mean reflecting on an intellectual level, but reflecting on a physical, emotional, and sensory level. During the writing process, the physical and

138

5  The Living Heritage of Dance: Dance Archives in Practice

sensory perceptions of the dance class intensified once again and expressed themselves in feelings, images, colours, words within me, which I then translated into the poems. Furthermore, when reading my own poems later, the corporeality, situation, and atmosphere of the corresponding dance immediately came back to me very clearly (much clearer than I know it from mere memory). […] Overall, poetry research is therefore classified as an important method for learning processes and represents a significant addition to theoretical knowledge as well as embodied knowledge gained from dance experiences, as knowledge can be perfected in this way.” This student paper clearly shows in which way methodical approaches can be tried out in the archive, implicit knowledge assets can be found and transmitted in one’s own reflective and creative work (The corresponding seminar paper is available from the author).

5.2.6 Choreographic Work Another methodological option used in the seminar was the choreographic development of movement sequences. The Choreografische Baukasten (Choreographic Toolbox) designed by Gabriele Klein and her team (Klein et al., 2011) proved to be very applicable in this context. Its concept understands choreographic work beyond its artistic obstinacy as a possible scientific access to knowledge. The changing understanding and practice of artistic processes is one of the main contributing factors to this: “[…] open, collaborative, research and teaching oriented, interdisciplinary practices increasingly characterise choreographic ways of working […]. Choreography can be seen as a specific kind of collaborative research, because it is oriented towards bodily practice, which opposes traditional forms of knowledge production with a culture of knowledge based on bodily experience” (Klein, 2019, p. 12). Thus, creative processes and innovative ways of working emerge in the rediscovery and appropriation of traditional working techniques. In this sense, the Choreografische Baukasten was conceived as a toolbox oriented towards contemporary choreographic practice. The Choreografische Baukasten is based on a research project at the Institute for Movement and Performance Studies at Hamburg University under the supervision of Gabriele Klein between 2008 and 2011. The material for the toolkit resulted from platforms and interviews with internationally renowned choreographers, who contributed their own experiences from choreographic projects and described their working methods. The toolkit primarily addresses choreographers, theatre professionals and dance educators. The material is suitable for creating a choreography as well as for workshops or trainings and further education in the field of dance. According to the concept, it should not matter whether one is an experienced dancer or uses the tools of the kit without experience in dance and choreography. Its structure reflects the principles of openness, processuality, practical insight, and exploratory knowledge generation. It offers a system of practice-oriented modules as a set of tools for choreographic research work. According to the editors, such a

5.2 The Performative Dance Archive – Research in Practice

139

conception of choreographic processes challenges classical hierarchies, repetitive and interpretive ways of working in scientific practice. Choreography can be seen as collaborative research that opposes traditional forms of knowledge production with a culture of knowledge based on bodily experience and performative processes (cf. Klein, 2019, pp. 12–14). Starting with a theoretical essay on the concept of choreography as well as on choreographic practice, access is provided for a five-part interwoven, yet non-binding, modular work: GENERATION / SHAPING / CHOREOGRAPHIC GAMES / COMPOSITION / COLLABORATION.  A brief insight into the module design is given here to illustrate the actual practicality of the concept. The module GENERATION aims at finding and developing movement material with the help of movement tasks. The first module ‘Warm-Up’ creates an introduction to the choreographic process and trains the ability to perceive. In the second module, ‘Finding Movement’, formal improvisation tasks help to find movement material using different approaches. The third module ‘Developing movements’ builds on the previous ones. It is about forming individual movements and putting them together in movement sequences with so-called tools (cf. Klein, 2019, pp. 59–73). In the module SHAPING, tools and procedures are addressed in order to be able to create movement material choreographically by defining, remembering, and repeating movement sequences. In the first module ‘Giving Form’ certain tools, such as duplicating, varying, contextualising, are used in the process of generating or also shaping the already existing movement material. In the second building block ‘Defining and Remembering’, tools and procedures are bundled which are well suited for defining and remembering generated movement material (ibid., pp. 81–96). In the module ‘CHOREOGRAPHIC GAMES’ the focus is on how to teach choreography in a playful way. Through the module ‘Play Patterns’, a framework of action, by which the game emerges, is created through the setting of rules. The rules can be determined and changed before the game or during the game. In the second building block ‘Choreography as a Game’, playful approaches are presented primarily for generating movement material (ibid., pp. 109–118). The module COMPOSITION frames the three modules outlined above. It consists of the modules dramaturgy, composition, and performance (ibid., p. 155). The module ‘dramaturgy’ questions the artistic realisation of the theme, the intention of the choreography, the working process, and the performance format. The building block ‘composition’ is about bringing together choreographic material. This means improvised and fixed movements and movement sequences. It also includes materials consisting of image, film, and language. With the help of tools, parameters and procedures of composition, the choreographic material is put together accordingly in the building block ‘performance’ (ibid., pp. 155–173). Crucial for a successful choreography is an optimal collaboration. Choreographic processes take place under very different conditions, for example as a free production or also under institutional constraints. The framework is decisive for deciding how the process should take place. Accordingly, the module COLLABORATION deals with the conceptual, institutional, spatial, temporal and financial conditions as well as the conditions in terms of staff on the one hand, and with the forms of collaboration and the

140

5  The Living Heritage of Dance: Dance Archives in Practice

participants in the choreographic process on the other (ibid., pp.  127–139). The variable modular work of the Choreografische Baukasten enables adequate access to the tools in practice, that can be adapted to the situation. The theoretical framing allows for a more in-depth foundation, especially in the combination with questions about the dance heritage and the choreographic techniques used. In this way, the choreographic work can above all demonstrate the links between traditional dance forms and techniques and contemporary dance practice and make it possible to experience them. This connection between choreographic work as a method and as a living archive of dance heritage is addressed in a variation of the seminar concept Performative Dance Archives. The block seminar Cultural Heritage of Dance. Choreographic Work as Method is about experiencing the heritage of modern dance in a contemporary context. For this purpose, dance practice and traditional scientific approaches are combined. Based on the discourse of dance studies, there are two central questions. Arguments are sought as to why science should concern itself with the forms and movement systems of modern dance, with their concepts of dance didactics, aesthetics, and their worldviews. And it will be worked out to what extent the ways of thinking and working, techniques and working methods that were already developed about a century ago, as well as the body and movement knowledge immanent in Modern Expressive Dance, are still relevant for the current multifaceted and complex fields of practice. The aim is to take an argumentative position on these fundamental questions in relation to the interplay between dance heritage and empractical research. The seminar takes the form of a choreographic dance laboratory for research in practice. This means working formats that combine practical and experiential knowledge with aesthetic and perceptive ways of knowing: empirical knowledge, medial transmission, empractical experience, creative design, and a reflection that takes all of these approaches into account. Thus, in the seminar, dance heritage will first be approached with cognitive approaches, as has already been described for the Performative Dance Archive, in order to then reconstruct dance heritage in an empathetic way using the Choreografischer Baukasten developed for the transmission of dance in practice and to implement it in movement studies. The question of the solidification [coregrafein] of the ephemeral provides the framework of a choreographic examination of dance heritage. The focus shifts to the situational organisation of certain movements and movement techniques in space and time, which is not externally determined but self-organised. This does not only dissolve the close connection between choreographers, dancers, and teachers; rather, the notion of choreography as a permanent transformation of movement organisation and implicit knowledge provokes a reflection on existing notions of traditions, procedures, and knowledge within the specific contemporary contexts (cf. in Klein, 2019, pp. 41–46). Ultimately, the concern and the ‘added value’ of the empractical experience in choreographic work consists in conveying the necessity and function of the living archives of movement: only the diversity of traditional and contemporary bodily mechanisms, forms of movement and corresponding knowledge enables a lively, dynamic development of social conditions as well as of the personality and potential of the individual.

5.2 The Performative Dance Archive – Research in Practice

141

5.2.7 Reflection Matrix for the Empractical Approach Completing the theoretical and practical approaches in the two seminar variants of the Performative Dance Archive was accompanied by a permanent critical reflection on the paths of experience, the perceptions, and the theoretical concepts. This made it possible to delimit various forms of movement in one’s own experience and to reflect on these experienced demarcations. In particular, the work methods outlined above made it possible to understand how the performative is tied to different media and to material, infrastructural, and personal components. Thus, media and materials were necessary through which dance situations are constituted. They are at the same time media that hold knowledge and are thus fundamental for the archival work. This complexity of media and materials includes language and verbalisation in the form of discourses and narratives on dance forms, training, practice, and performance. Likewise, images, pictures, and pictorial material are part of this canon of discourse and dance situations. For this area, corresponding meanings and (social) moods could be assigned by studying the origins or analysing images. In addition, there are documents that refer to media and objects of historical and contemporary discourses on dance. Movement itself is one of the constitutive media: it is through movement that the states of mind, bodily techniques and processes of knowledge, transmission and cognition, that generate the dance moment, are first acted out and made perceptible. Further components are the corresponding spaces, bodies, materials, and utensils in the dance situations. Finally, the essential medium – and all too often forgotten – are dancers in persona, who perform and convey forms of movement as dance practices. The dance-specific labels of bodywork, quality of movement, materialities, movement space, and sensory-aesthetic experiences were identified as constitutive of the empractic experience. They refer to the processes of incorporation and the implicit knowledge involved, as well as to the processes of recording movement sequences and their perception in the context of archival work. In the context of the seminar, the following proved to be useful differentiating categories for a subsequent reflected examination of what was experienced in the situation: movement techniques and body mechanics; the understanding of corporeality in the respective dance form; a positioning in the social hierarchy or social habitus, which ultimately refers to the entire social context, as far as this can be experienced; emotional and affective connectedness as well as forms of communication within the dance situation (cf. especially in Diehl & Lampert, 2011, pp. 24–27). This made it possible to grasp relationships between movement in space, audible music and perceived sounds, experiential and perceptible corporeality, clothing and materials used, perceived atmosphere and individual somatic, kinaesthetic, emotional, and affective impressions, stylistic features of the movement performed, and communication with each other as a complex dance situation. In addition to this verbalised or written traditional method of reflection on the basis of categories relevant to the research discourse or elaborated from the research situation, the reflection can be continued on the level of creative processing or

142

5  The Living Heritage of Dance: Dance Archives in Practice

editing. For this purpose, reference should be made, for example, to the student working within the framework of the artistic research approach described above. She deepened the empractical experience by means of poetic processing during or after the practice hours and its further musical processing. Another student chose yet a different performative approach to processing what was experienced in the seminar through dance. He used sand, a symbolically charged material, as a connecting element in order to make the aspects of the ephemerality of the dance moment, the inscribed traces, as well as the choreographed movement between the dimension of space and the flow of time visible in a performance. By attaching containers filled with sand to his ankles, he drew traces of his movement choreography into the space; the lines reflected the time he spent in one place, and the dynamics and intensity of his body movements. He left a symbolically charged inscription of his presence in the space. Other such practical attempts with dance failed to achieve the objective formulated in advance. However, the process of creative failure was equally valuable in terms of knowledge. A circumstance of research practice that the students became aware of at the very latest during the presentation and reflection of their work process. Despite the limited possibilities of a single seminar in the university setting, the potential of empractical research methods has already been perceived by the students and was used for their own scientific processes of gaining knowledge.

5.3 (Un)Critical Aspects in Terms of the Scientific Nature of the Approach In every reconstruction from the archive, a trace of the lost, the irretrievable – the trace of the unavailability of memory itself – remains as a blank space. At the same time, transformations, distortions as well as new formations of what has been occur. Gabriele Brandstetter in Odenthal: The Century of Dance, p. 283

With this kind of work for a living archive, it might be possible to do justice to the special characteristics and knowledge of dance situations as well as other performative practices. This allows for such a space of possibility to be established in the first place – both in the sense of options for knowledge gained from empractical experience as well as an actual infrastructural space for putting empractical experience into practice. Basically, it remains to be said that only the integration of this knowledge into the cognitive process enables access to it. By combining epistemological foundations, approaches of practice theories, current discourses from dance studies and selfexperienced practical knowledge, concepts in the field of the safeguarding and transmission of knowledge for performative practices are – ideally – implemented, reflected upon and (further) developed. Furthermore, it will be possible to develop an awareness of the relevance of this knowledge and its potential for shaping society. At the same time, the first aspects to be reconsidered with regard to the methodological suitability of a dance archive become apparent. The possibilities for reflecting on empractical experiences that go hand in hand with the work in the Performative

5.3  (Un)Critical Aspects in Terms of the Scientific Nature of the Approach

143

Dance Archive should be specified and mentioned continuously. This is about using appropriate categories and language for the observation and verbalisation; but it also concerns the procedures and methods that are used in the context of the archival work, and level of differentiation with which they are applied. Approaches to describing empractical experience must be questioned and rediscovered again and again: in what form and with what limitations can it be formulated and laid down? For example, one could work according to meticulous category systems such as those provided by Laban’s movement analysis, or with the emotive-poetic linguistic formulation found, for example, in Jean-Luc Nancy’s publication Ausdehnung der Seele: Texte zu Körper, Kunst und Tanz (Expansion of the Soul: Texts on Body, Art and Dance), published in German by Diaphanes in 2010, or in Laurence Louppé’s Poetik des zeitgenössischen Tanzes (Poetics of Contemporary Dance) published in German by transcript in 2009. Perhaps, however, a different form of expression and transmission can be found for these experiences situated in dance practice. In addition to the constant criticism and questioning of methodology, it should also be a matter of reflecting on the value of empractical experiences and knowledge that is generated exclusively in practice: are they of equal value, contradictory, a supplement or even a prerequisite for cognitive knowledge, or should not all the knowledge involved be regarded as equally justified? This is a reference to the understanding of scientificity described at the beginning of this publication, which is concerned with generating knowledge and gaining insight. In this sense, there is a demand for a paradigm shift to the effect that incorporated knowledge as well as empractical experiences gained through methodological approaches are to be added to the existing categories of knowledge. Can we possibly go so far as to abandon the paradigm of text for scientifically legitimised knowledge and, having non-linguistic and empractical forms of knowledge in mind that can only be experienced, allow them to be considered just that? Another aspect relates to the process of creating an archive itself: it results from strategies of institutionalisation or formalisation according to predetermined criteria for selection and access as well as for describing and categorising according to normative dispositions. This establishes conventions and standards for discourses and for practical action. Archives are thus constitutive collections of discourses, artefacts, and knowledge. At the same time, these collections provide opportunities for empractical work in the sense that knowledge, possibilities of access, and infrastructures are available independent of specific moments in time. In contrast, the canonisation strategies simultaneously establish normative dispositions of these collections as well as criteria for selection and access. These functional processes in the archive establish artefacts, practices, and processes of generation as a momentary fact. It is important to become aware of these processes in the sense of a critical reflection of archival work. Strategies and categories, as well as positions and standardisations, must then be part of a relativising validation of the generation of knowledge. With regard to the contents of the archive, it must become clear who selects what, with what justification and with what intention. Furthermore, it is up for discussion what kind of repercussions the scientific interest in dance practices might have for them, and to what extent the work in the dance archive might affect institutional structures and discourses.

144

5  The Living Heritage of Dance: Dance Archives in Practice

So much for the attempt to present a concept that at first seems evident – which, however, is still neither accepted in the necessary form within academic practice, nor easy to implement – in terms of its methodological suitability. As a new path, the Performative Dance Archive can provide the necessary space to explore questions that are still unanswered, to learn to deal with them and to help answer them in a way that critically engages with methods and science.

References Bibliography Diehl, I., & Lampert, F. (Eds.). (2011). Tanztechniken 2010 – Tanzplan Deutschland. Henschel. Fleischle-Braun, C., Obermaier, K., & Temme, D. (Eds.). (2017). Zum immateriellen Kulturerbe des Modernen Tanzes. Konzepte – Konkretisierungen – Perspektiven. transcript. Gehm, S., Husemann, P., & von Wilcke, K. (Eds.). (2007). Wissen in Bewegung. Perspektiven der künstlerischen und wissenschaftlichen Forschung im Tanz. transcript. Klein, G. (2019). Pina Bausch und das Tanztheater. Die Kunst des Übersetzens. transcript. Klein, G., Barthel, G., & Wagner, E. (2011). Der Choreografische Baukasten. transcript. Quinten, S., & Schroedter, S. (Eds.). (2016). Tanzpraxis in der Forschung  – Tanz als Forschungspraxis. Choreographie – Improvisation – Exploration. transcript.

Chapter 6

Conclusion: Perspectives for the Living Heritage of Dance

As the complexity and scope of movements grows, so does this world. Gebauer/Wulf in Play – Ritual – Gesture, p. 33

The present study worked on conceptualisations and forms of safeguarding for dance heritage. An important point of reference for this was the idea of a living cultural heritage. As a starting point for the argumentation, it was possible to refer to the efforts evident in the current research discourse to investigate processes and situations of performative, aesthetic or generally cultural practices with adequate terms and tools. Thus, the aim of this study was to work out possible approaches. These were illustrated by the example of dance or rather by placing the dance heritage in a concrete situational context. In the argumentation, directed at making corresponding conceptual and categorial issues as well as the methodological practice comprehensible, conflicting positions, argumentations and perspectives formulated in the various discourses became apparent. This was used as a basis for further thinking and developing them with regard to their practical relevance. A draft of a research perspective that corresponds to this objective in terms of both theory and methodology, as well as practical implementation, has been formulated in this publication. In this concluding chapter, the argumentations of this study are summarised in order to find answers to the questions formulated at the beginning. Following this, the oxymoron of the intangible is once again clearly emphasised. The chapter concludes with an outlook on the cultural heritage of dance and the options for its implementation in the sense of a living heritage of dance.

6.1 Arguments for a Living Heritage of Dance The first chapter introduced the topic of the cultural heritage of dance and the current state of research. The understanding of intangible cultural heritage in the context of the 2003 Convention was outlined. At its heart are the cultural practices to be © The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2023 V. Kämpfe, Dance Practices as Research, Heritage Studies, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-30581-8_6

145

146

6  Conclusion: Perspectives for the Living Heritage of Dance

safeguarded. Following on from this, it became clear from a praxeological perspective and by means of the concept of performativity that they are to be characterised as constitutive for social processes. Furthermore, it was argued that cultural practices manifest themselves through the interplay of three characteristics. These include their processual nature with the aspects of their temporal and spatial constraints as well as their constant changes; furthermore, they are tied to the corporeality of the performers as well as the general necessity of performing actors; and finally, their implicit knowledge and the corresponding categories of knowledge. Concluding from this, methodological approaches to cultural practice were presented. The approaches of research in practice and artistic research within the framework of empractical research methods were primarily taken into account. The case study on the intangible cultural heritage of tango, which was listed in 2009, served as an illustration of the points of conflict that need to be mentioned in the discussion on dance heritage. The procedures, interests, and changes on various levels associated with the nomination process became apparent. Further on, critical positions could be formulated, especially with regard to the appropriation for political and economic interests as well as with regard to the imposed development of cultural practices. The results of the case study led to an ambivalent evaluation and ultimately call for the equal participation and responsibility of all actors involved. The second chapter was dedicated to the concept of the intangible in the context of performative situations. The concept of the intangible was elaborated both in the understanding of the UNESCO Convention of 2003 and in the understanding of the sociology of movement. Its special characteristic is the genuinely implicit knowledge as well as the processes of change and transformation. The concepts of performativity, materialities, and agentiality from the discourses of cultural and dance studies were discussed in terms of the extent to which they can serve as meaningful arguments in the discussion of the concept of the intangible. Subsequently, these determinations of the intangible were examined and tested using dance practices as an example. It was concluded that dance practice is a moment that is to be described again and again in permanent processes of becoming movement in, through and as materiality, in which all personal, material, factual, and infrastructural components involved have an equal share. In this context, it proved useful that the performative can be used as a key concept for describing the interconnectedness of practices, things, circumstances, conditionalities, processes of becoming, and set meanings, which is still problematic and elusive in the current discourse. This was followed by the third chapter on the value of – not only dance – movement. In the argumentation, dance practices were first determined as a performative action within social processes. Within this framework, connected functions and mechanisms of dance situations were traced on the different levels that are to be differentiated. In particular, the functions of incorporation, reproduction, and generation of their knowledge proved to be important aspects with regard to processes of social development. In this context, it was possible use knowledge concepts of dance studies and cultural sociology in order to retrace approaches for a concept of movement knowledge as a new sociological concept of movement. Here, movements are understood as body-bound social practices and knowledge cultures as

6.1  Arguments for a Living Heritage of Dance

147

part of a knowledge concept of practice. In this way, the problem of conceptualising non-discursive knowledge was formulated and addressed, and the particular characteristics of movement knowledge, and dance knowledge were illustrated. In the context of the options presented for recording, communicating, and archiving dance practices, it was finally possible to describe the mentioned practices and processes of dance situations in their conceptual amalgamation as a living archive of dance. Based on this conceptual framework, it was furthermore possible to deal more concretely with the safeguarding and transmission of dance heritage in the present. Particular attention was paid to the processes of institutionalisation of informal practices as well as the concept of the archive caught in the contradiction between the (lived) safeguarding and the recording of cultural assets. The fourth chapter then developed performative methods as an adequate scientific approach to dance practices and the knowledge inherent in them. This was based on the argument that dance practices refer to both cognitively perceivable and incorporated, and thus necessarily person-bound knowledge. Together they form a dance knowledge, for which three levels became clear. Thus, a knowledge of dance means describing and grasping through analytical methods such as perception; knowledge about dance refers to the circulating discursive knowledge in the form of a discourse; knowledge through dance refers to one’s own bodily, sensorial and emotional understanding in the form of an empractical experience. The descriptions of the knowledge located in dance practice were then compared with the previously elaborated determinations of the intangible. This revealed the extent to which extent dance practice refers to a cultural materiality as well as to specific body-aesthetic qualities and is characterised by permanent changes, that arise from constantly being torn between the aspects of presence, ephemerality, and authentic practice. Finally, these differentiations provided sufficient justification for perceiving dance practices as socially and individually constitutive repositories of knowledge. Accordingly, they are not only regarded as a scientific object of research, but are themselves a performative method in their exercise. Thus, they function at the same time as a way of accessing knowledge generated by themselves. The fifth chapter looked at the practical implementation. It presented the conception and implementation of a Performative Dance Archive as a way of thinking about and analysing dance practices in the context of university seminars. The Performative Dance Archive works simultaneously as a cognitive and empractical method for recording, archiving, and communicating dance knowledge. In particular, it turned out that such a work of a living archive could succeed in doing justice to the special characteristics and knowledge of dance situations as well as other performative practices. This allows for such a space of possibility to be established in the first place – both in the sense of options for knowledge gained from empractical experience as well as an actual infrastructural space for putting empractical experience into practice. Basically, it remains to be said that only the integration of this knowledge into the cognitive process enables access to it. A reflection on the basis of this practical experience concluded the chapter. With regard to the suitability of the method, the aspect of the linguistic and scientific representation of empractical experience, but also the meaningful categorisation of such knowledge remains

148

6  Conclusion: Perspectives for the Living Heritage of Dance

to be considered. Another aspect focuses on the archiving process for dance practices. This primarily involves the criteria for their selection and the value assigned through the selection of certain practices. Furthermore, it remains unanswered what scientific access actually means for dance practices in terms of processes of change and mechanisms of formalisation. Research on this issue is still pending. In the process of developing and outlining the arguments and positions, the question of how the intangible can be determined and in what way it can be conveyed was explored. As the arguments were developed, it became apparent to what extent determinations of space, time and corporeality, but also of materiality and agentiality, are determined as aspects of the intangible. This in turn provided new options for describing them in their interpersonal and socio-structural processes and meanings as a multi-layered interweaving of practices, things, circumstances, conditionalities, processes of becoming and meanings. For this purpose, the concepts of presence and performativity could be used. What then determines cultural practice in any media-transmitted form, whether textual, verbal, online, visual as photography, video recording or soundtrack, as a work of art in the various material formats, as exhibited objects, body-transmitted, as a scientific object of interest or as part of an archive’s collection? Ultimately, a broad concept of culture can be used for this, in which any agentiality detected by human perception of all the components involved in situations lived by humans is already part of a specific cultural practice. In this broad definition, the mediality of the modes of transmission and the forms of expression is only a descriptive label that in no way defines or ascribes value. A further argumentative starting point proved to be the questioning of the extent to which the intangible can be separated from the tangible. This aspect of the discussion ultimately guided the argumentation of this study: to what extent such a separation can be determined and should be maintained. From the presented complex interrelationships of required skills, abilities, practices, artefacts created by human action and cultural practice, it became evident that the categorical demarcation between a tangible and intangible cultural heritage is not possible. Therefore, these conceptualisations should be discussed further. Nevertheless, it can be stated that the conceptual coinage of an intangible cultural heritage has been able to start important discussions, both for academic discourse, but especially for social perception. As a result, values and concepts that were considered to be self-evident were questioned, and above all changes in perception and processes of awareness were initiated on the levels of politics, groups and individuals. Furthermore, these considerations call for a reflection on what happens to cultural practices when they are recorded, described, and communicated within the categories of intangible cultural heritage. As has been made clear in the course of the argumentation, cultural practices are shaped by the concrete conditions of their local and temporal setting, the people who practice them, and the objects and spaces in which they are carried out. The recognition as intangible cultural heritage, on the other hand, implies an evaluative and possibly prescriptive designation. As the case study on the intangible cultural heritage of tango could already demonstrate, there can be ambivalent developments in this regard. The possible changes in cultural practices associated with the nomination process, whether positive or negative,

6.2  The Oxymoron of the Intangible or What to Do with the Dance Heritage?

149

depend on the interests of all parties involved. In view of these concerns, we can only appeal urgently to the responsibility of those involved at all levels to observe and reflect honestly and critically on the processes and developments associated with the nomination procedures. At the same time, this calls for participation and equal communication between those involved at all levels. Although this is certainly difficult and may lead to conflicts in which individual, group and political interests clash, only such a direct, open, and dynamic approach to the topic and implementation of the idea of cultural heritage can do justice to the desired and urgently needed safeguarding and communication of cultural practices.

6.2 The Oxymoron of the Intangible or What to Do with the Dance Heritage? The separation of materiality and immateriality cannot be maintained. This became obvious from the argumentations and could be illustrated above all by the example of dance heritage. For one thing, it was not possible to clearly determine the demarcations between the defining categories of tangible, intangible, and personal. For another, something intangible by itself is not perceptible to us. The so-called intangible is not limited to the ephemeral without spatial, temporal, or contextual localisations. There is no cultural heritage, implicit knowledge of skills, knowledge, no experiences, and abilities, perceptions, thoughts and emotions that are not bound to materialities, to persons, to artefacts and processes of becoming. The concept of the intangible seems to be created as a terminology to make the coexistence of persons, things, spatial dimensions, and temporal processes comprehensible to human rationality. However, the so-called tangible nature of artefacts created by humans does not exist without the intangible aspect, and the intangible is found in between and as a part of the tangible. Thus, in the course of the argumentations from a theoretical perspective as well as in practice, the intangible was recuperated as a necessary part of the whole and the categorial separation of the intangible, tangible and personal was abolished argumentatively and out of empractical experience. The wider significance of this complex conglomerate of the intangible – tangible consists above all in the insight that it forms the socio-cultural structure of society. In relation to dance situations, this dense interweaving of both qualities has been described as the movement material of performative processes that can constitute themselves as dance. However, with regard to intangible cultural heritage the following question arises: if dance is not a purely intangible thing at all, how do we argue for its cultural heritage status? And in the conclusion drawn from the arguments of this study, should not the concept of cultural heritage then also be reconsidered in order to actually do justice to the aim of safeguarding? Since the significance of dance heritage for current cultural practice and for future development could be clearly substantiated, its status as cultural heritage cannot be disputed. And it was precisely the classification of dance as intangible cultural heritage that made this process of awareness building possible. Consequently, the challenge

150

6  Conclusion: Perspectives for the Living Heritage of Dance

now arises to conceptually discuss the categorical separation of a tangible and intangible cultural heritage. However, ultimately only practice can provide a sufficient answer to this, since only there is the necessary experience of what actually constitutes cultural heritage located. Following these thought processes, a coherent argumentation in relation to a living dance heritage could be elaborated in the present study. Starting from dance studies and cultural sociology, the approaches for a concept of movement knowledge as a newly established sociological concept of movement were traced. Within this framing, dance knowledge is identified as a category of knowledge which encompasses complex conceptualisations to be able to grasp dance practices. On the one hand, this means knowledge about the origins and development of dance and the specificity of dance forms, on the other hand, knowledge in the sense of an embodiment of the social and historical norms and conditions in dance, and finally, the knowledge associated with the performance of dance practices. This specificity of dance practice is primarily found in the differentiated aspects of corporeality and the cultural materiality of corporeality; in the concepts of ephemerality, changes and authenti(ci)ty as well as the closely related questions of ephemerality and presence; in the quality of movement as the so-called expressive power as well as in the processes of incorporation of a body signature through bodywork. Such a comprehensive and multi-layered conceptualisation of dance knowledge ultimately calls for new kinds of transmission and safeguarding of dance practices. The idea of a performative movement archive represents a conception corresponding to these requirements. In terms of perspective, this is based on the idea that only the diversity of bodily mechanisms, modes of movement, and the associated implicit knowledge enables a lively, dynamic development of social conditions as well as of the personality and potentials of the individual. For this, modes, spaces, and possibilities must be established as infrastructural dispositions in order to preserve, convey and exercise respective movement practices. This requires an empractical experience of this, in order to create awareness of these necessities. In this argumentative context, the concept of cultural memory is reformulated in the understanding of a living cultural heritage, which demands and presupposes precisely this individual empractical experience. Such a description of cultural heritage is characterised by its constant processual character of becoming and changing, its ties to the corporeality of the practitioners involved, to materialities, and to media of all kinds, as well as to the practices of its safeguarding, transmission, and exercise. In conclusion, the responsibility of the present for a living culture and a living heritage becomes evident: the present decides what is to be remembered and how it is to be shaped, signified, and communicated. Thus, the present has the task of constituting the cultural heritage by naming, remembering, practicing, and communicating it. At the same time, this comprehensive task can be reduced to a simple conclusion: we are, each for ourselves and within a community, living archives of our cultural practice on all levels and in all areas of life that can be differentiated. In the same way, each dancer lives in his or her own dance world, filled with his or her own way of dancing, consisting of movement mechanics, training routines, dimensions of sound and space, a personal or artistic self-image, an individual

References

151

socio-cultural background or sensitivities and peculiarities. An appropriate way of with dance heritage calls for a comprehensive rethinking of the methodical approach to comprehending, safeguarding and transmitting such multi-layered form of knowledge. Such a methodology is being developed on the basis of praxeological approaches using performative concepts and empractical approaches in the current research work of dance studies. As a consequence of the argumentations that have been outlined, its implementation and examination must primarily take place in dance practice and in the context of research in practice. Based on the findings from the current research discourse and from the implemented approaches of research in practice, this study offers a line of argumentation for a living dance heritage. The discussion of essential and more detailed aspects as well as the discussed experiences from research projects in practice provide new impulses for the further development of presented and tested concepts and allow for a critical understanding of practical approaches. The concept of the Performative Dance Archive represents a possibility for a living cultural heritage of dance. It is a path with still many open and unanswered questions. At the same time, it is a path that is subject to a constant process of becoming, just like dance itself.

References Bibliography Albert, M.-T. (2011). Machbarkeitsstudie – Umsetzung der UNESCO-Konvention zur Bewahrung des immateriellen Kulturerbes in Deutschland. BTU Heritage Studies at Cottbus University. Andrade Butzonitch, M. M. (2009). Poder, Patrimonio y Democracia. Andamios, 12, 11–40. Appadurai, A. (Ed.). (20097). The social life of things. Commodities in cultural perspective. University Press. Artus, H.-G., & Paulissen-Kaspar, M. (1999). Tänzerische Körperbildung. Lehrweise Rosalia Chladek. Noetzel. Assmann, A. (1999). Zeit und Tradition. Kulturelle Strategien der Dauer. Verlag Böhlau. Bachmann-Medick, D. (2006). Cultural Turns. Neuorientierungen in den Kulturwissenschaften. Rowohlt. Barrionuevo Anzaldi, F. (2012). Politischer Tango. Intellektuelle Kämpfe um Tanzkultur im Zeichen des Peronismus. transcript. Bernier, I. (2004). A UNESCO international convention on cultural diversity. In C.  B. Graber, M. Griesberger, & M. Nenova (Eds.), Free trade versus cultural diversity: WTO negotiations in the field of audiovisual services (pp. 65–76). Schulthess. Blake, J. (2000). On defining the cultural heritage. International and Comparative Law Quarterly, 49, 61–85. Böhle, F., & Weihrich, M. (Eds.). (2010). Die Körperlichkeit sozialen Handelns. Soziale Ordnung jenseits von Normen und Institutionen. transcript. Borges, J. L. (20083/1991). Kabbalah and Tango. Essays 1930–1932. Fischer. Bourdieu, P. (1982). Die feinen Unterschiede. Kritik der gesellschaftlichen Urteilskraft. Suhrkamp. Bourdieu, P. (1983). The field of cultural production, or: The economic world reversed. Poetics, 12, S.311–S.356. Butler, J. (1998). Hass spricht. Zur Politik des Performativen. Berlin Verlag.

152

6  Conclusion: Perspectives for the Living Heritage of Dance

Carozzi, M.  J. (2003). Carlos Gardel, el Patrimonio que sonrie. Horizontes Antropológicos, 20(9), 59–82. Comisión para la Preservación del Patrimonio Histórico Cultural de la Ciudad de Buenos Aires. Temas de Patrimonio 1, Buenos Aires 2001 Comisión para la Preservación del Patrimonio Histórico Cultural de la Ciudad de Buenos Aires. Primeras jornadas de patrimonio intangible: memorias, identidades e imaginarios sociales, Buenos Aires 2001 Conde, O. La Poesía del Tango, in: IES N° 1 – Academia Porteña del Lunfardo. Online: http:// www.sagrado.edu.ar/revistas/revista5/poesia_tango.htm. Last access: 27 Jan 2021. Copeland, R., & Cohen, M. (Eds.). (1983). What is dance. Readings in theory and criticism. Oxford University Press. Deutsche UNESCO-Kommission. (2009). UNESCO-Weltbericht, in: kulturelle Vielfalt und interkulturellen Dialog investieren. Deutsche Kurzfassung, Bonn. Online: https://www.unesco.de/ sites/default/files/2018-­07/Weltbericht_FINAL.pdf. Letzter Zugriff: 27 Jan 2021. Deutsche UNESCO-Kommission (2012). Das lebendige Kulturerbe kennen lernen und wertschätzen. Online: http://preview2018.unesco.de/sites/default/files/2018-­04/120831Arbeitspapier_ Lebendiges_Kultuerbe.pdf. Letzter Zugriff: 27 Jan 2021. Deutscher Bundestag. (2009, June 11). Antwort der Bundesregierung auf eine Kleine Anfrage – Drucksache 16/13243  – UNESCO-Übereinkommen zur Bewahrung des immateriellen Kulturerbes vom 17. Oktober 2003. Drucksache 16/13343. Online: http://dipbt.bundestag.de/ dip21/btd/16/133/1613343.pdf. Letzter Zugriff: 27 Jan 2021. Deutscher Bundestag. (2011a). Drucksache 17/6314, 17. Wahlperiode, 29. 06. 2011. Ratifizierung der UNESCO-Konvention zum immateriellen Kulturerbe vorantreiben. Online: https://dip21. bundestag.de/dip21/btd/17/063/1706314.pdf. Letzter Zugriff: 27 Jan 2021. Deutscher Bundestag. (2011b). Drucksache 17/8121, 17. Wahlperiode, 13. 12. 2011. Beschlussempfehlung und Bericht des Ausschusses für Kultur und Medien. Online: http:// dipbt.bundestag.de/dip21/btd/17/081/1708121.pdf. Letzter Zugriff: 27 Jan 2021. Diaz-Bone, R. (20102). Kulturwelt, Diskurs und Lebensstil. Eine diskurstheoretische Erweiterung der bourdieuschen Distinktionstheorie. Leske+Budrich. Elsner, M. (2000). Das vier-beinige Tier. Bewegungsdialog und Diskurse des Tango Argentino. Lang. Eshkol, N., & Wachman, A. (1958). Movement Notation. Weidenfeld & Nicolson. Esposito, E. (2002). Soziales Vergessen. Formen und Medien des Gedächtnisses der Gesellschaft. Suhrkamp. Ferrer, H. A. (1971). el libro del tango: historia e imágenes. Ediciones Ossorio. Fesel, B., & Söndermann, M. (2007). Culture and creative industries in Germany. Deutsche UNESCO-Kommission e.V. Fischer-Lichte, E., Horn, C., & Warstat, M. (Eds.). (2001). Verkörperung. Francke. Fleischle-Braun, C. (2022). Moderner Tanz  – Created in Dresden. Wechselwirkungen, Traditionslinien und Netzwerke. Klotz. Foucault, M. (1997). Die Ordnung des Diskurses. Fischer. Foucault, M. (199915). Die Ordnung der Dinge. Eine Archäologie der Humanwissenschaften. Fischer. Franko, M. (2006). Dance and the political: States of exception, in. Dance Research Journal, 1/2(38), 3–18. Gálvez, E. (2009). El tango en su época de gloria: ni prostibulario, ni orillero. Los bailes en los clubes sociales y deportivos de Buenos Aires 1938–1959, in: Nuevo Mundo Mundos Nuevos, Debates. Online: http://nuevomundo.revues.org/55183. Last access: 27 Jan 2021. García Canclini, N. (1994). ¿Quiénes usan el patrimonio? Políticas culturales y participación social. In Memorias del Simposio Patrimonio y Política Cultural para el siglo XXI (pp. 51–68). INAH. García Canclini, N. (1990/2001). Culturas Híbridas, estrategias para entrar y salir de la modernidad. Grijalbo/Paidas. Garibaldi, D. (2010). El Tango Extranjero. The International Role in Creating a National Symbol. Online: http://dukespace.lib.duke.edu/dspace/bitstream/handle/10161/2253/Garibaldi_Final_ Thesis.pdf?sequence=1. Last accessed 27 Jan 2021.

References

153

Garnham, N. (2005). From cultural to creative industries. International Journal of Cultural Policy, 1(11), 15–29. Gebhardt, W., & Hitzler, R. (Eds.). (2006). Nomaden, Flaneure, Vagabunden. Wissensformen und Denkstile der Gegenwart. VS. Gesellschaft für Tanzforschung e.V. (2020). newsletter#5 (5). González Hernández, G. M. Patrimonio cultural, ciudades y rentabilidad. Unidad Académica de Estudios del Desarrollo, UAZ, in: Observatorio del Desarrollo 3 (1), p. 25/26 Graham, B. (2002). Heritage as knowledge: Capital or culture? Urban Studies, 5–6(39), 1003–1017. Grossberg, L. (1997). Dancing in spite of myself. Essays on popular culture. Duke University Press. Haitzinger, N. (2007). Choreografie als Denkfigur. Online: http://www.corpusweb.net/ choreografie-­als-­Denkfigur-­2007-­1847-­1769-­7.html. Letzter Zugriff: 14 Nov 2017. Hobsbawm, E., & Ranger, T. (Eds.). (1995/1983). The invention of tradition. University Press. Hüfner, K., & Reuther, W. (Eds.). (2005). UNESCO Handbuch. UNO-Verlag. Hüster, W. (2013). Warum Rekonstruktionen im Tanz aufregend, wichtig und sinnvoll sind. Online: https://blogs.faz.net/tanz/2013/11/10/warum-­rekonstruktion-­im-­tanz-­aufregendwichtig-­und-­ sinnvoll-­sind-­465/. Letzter Zugriff: 27 Jan 2021. Jeschke, C. (2009). Tanznotate. Bilder, Texte, Wissen. In G. Brandstetter, F. Hofmann, & K. Maar (Eds.), Notation und Choreografisches Denken. Rombach. Johnson, C. J., & Snyder, A. F. (1999). Securing our dance heritage: Issues in the documentation and safeguarding of dance. Council on Library and Information Resources. Kagan, S., & Kirchberg, V. (Eds.). (2008). Sustainability: A new frontier for the arts and cultures. VAS; in it: Tubadji, Annie: Sustainable Utilization of Cultural Heritage Resources for Socio-Economic Development Purposes: what has to be done by institutions and organizations? pp. 461–496; and Koefoed, Oleg: Zones of Sustension: an exploration of eventuality, culturality, and collective intuition in life and work, pp. 59–92. Kämpfe, V. (2007). Tango der Metropolen. Bedeutungsveränderungen des Tango auf seinen Weg von Buenos Aires in die europäischen Metropolenkulturen. diplomica. Kämpfe, V. (2020). Performative Tanzarchive. Ein Zugang zu tänzerischen Praktiken inmitten von (Im)Materialitäten. In M. Bischof & F. Lampert (Eds.), Sinn und Sinne im Tanz. Perspektiven aus Kunst und Wissenschaft (Jahrbuch Tanzforschung Bd. 30) (pp. 55–62). transcript. Karoß, S., & Welzin, L. (Eds.). (2001). Tanz. Politik. Identität (Jahrbuch Tanzforschung Bd. 11). LIT. Klein, G., & Noeth, S. (Eds.). (2011). Emerging bodies. The performance of worldmaking in dance and choreography. transcript. Kockel, U., & Nic Craith, M. (Eds.). (2007). Cultural heritage as reflexive traditions. Palgrave Macmillan. Köhne-Kirsch, V. (1990). Die „schöne Kunst“ des Tanzes. Phänomenologische Erörterung einer flüchtigen Kunstart. Peter Lang. Leigh Foster, S. (1986). Reading dancing. Bodies and subjects in contemporary American dance. University of California Press. Liska, M.  M. (2008). Cultura popular y nuevas tecnologías: El baile de Neo-Tango. la revista del CCC (2). Online: http://www.centrocultural.coop/revista/articulo/32. Last accessed 27 Jan 2021. Martin, A. Política cultural y patrimonio inmaterial en el carnaval de Buenos Aires. ILHA Revista de Antropologia, o.A., 297–313. Merkel, C., & Steinkamp, A. (Eds.). (2007). Kulturelle Vielfalt – Unser gemeinsamer Reichtum: das Essener/RUHR.2010. Handbuch zur Internationalen Fachkonferenz „Kulturelle Vielfalt – Europas Reichtum. Das UNESCO-Übereinkommen mit Leben füllen“. DUK. Mesa, P.  L. Eduardo Rovira y el reposicionamiento del tango en las décadas del 50 y 60. Universidad Nacional de La Plata. Online: http://www.webarchivo.unvm.edu.ar/images/noticias/actas%20res%C3%BAmenes%20congreso%20musica%20popular.pdf. Last accessed 14 Nov 2017.

154

6  Conclusion: Perspectives for the Living Heritage of Dance

Montoya, H., Muñoz, A. M., & Toro, N. Q. (2008). Tango, Memoria y Patrimonio. Programa de Memoria y Patrimonio Secretaria de Cultura Ciudadana Alcaldía de Medellín. Online: http:// www.reddebibliotecas.org.co/Cultura/Multimedias/tango/lecturas/5.pdf. Last accessed 14 Nov 2017. Morel, H. (2011). “Milonga que va borrando fronteras”. Las políticas del patrimonio. Intersecciones en Antropología, 12, 163–176. Müller, H., & Stöckemann, P. (1993). “…jeder Mensch ist ein Tänzer” Ausdruckstanz in Deutschland zwischen 1900 und 1945. Anabas. Öhlschläger, C., & Wiens, B. (Eds.). (1997). Körper  – Gedächtnis  – Schrift: der Körper als Medium kultureller Erinnerung. Schmidt. Pourian, H. (n.d.). Eine berührbare Welt: Contact Improvisation als gesellschaftsbewegende Kultur. Online: https://www.beruehrbarewelt.de/pdf_download_book/eineber%C3%BChrbarewelt_ heikepourian_1auflage_ansicht.pdf. Last access: 27 Jan 2021. Ramírez, J., Benjamín, M., & Sainz Navarro, M. (2011). ¿Quién hace al patrimonio? Su valoración y uso desde la perspectiva del campo de poder. Intervención. Revista Internacional de Conservación, Restauración y Museología, 3(2), 14–21. Ricoeur, P. (2004). Gedächtnis, Geschichte, Vergessen. Fink. Sabato, E. (1963). Tango. Discusion y clave. Losada o.A. Savigliano, M. E. (1995). Tango and the political Economy of Passion. Westview Press. Savigliano, M. E. (2000). Nocturnal Ethnographies: Following Cortázar in the Milongas of Buenos Aires. TRANS revista transcultural de música (5). Schmidt, R. (2012). Soziologie der Praktiken. Konzeptionelle Studien und empirische Analysen. Suhrkamp. Schroer, M. (Ed.). (2005). Soziologie des Körpers. Suhrkamp. Schweizerische Eidgenossenschaft. (2008). Memopolitik. Eine Politik des Bundes zu den Gedächtnissen der Schweiz (Bericht des Bundesamtes für Kultur. Eidgenössisches Departement des Innern). Bundesamt für Kultur. Sebillotte, L. Archivbildung im Tanz aus der Sicht des Archivars. Online: http://www.perfomap. de/map6/collect-­and-­record/archival-­education-­in-­dance-­from-­the-­archivist’s-­viewpoint. Last accessed 14 Nov 2017. Sheets-Johnstone, M. (1981). Thinking in Movement. The Journal of Aesthetics and Art Criticism, 4(39), 399–407. Sheets-Johnstone, M. (1999). The primacy of movement. John Benjamins Publishing Company. Shilling, C. (1993). The body and social theory. Sage. Siegmund, G. (Ed.). (2004). William Forsythe. Denken in Bewegung. Henschel. Smith, L., & Akagawa, N. (Eds.). (2009). Intangible heritage. Routledge. Spencer, P. (Ed.). (1985). Society and the Dance. The social anthropology of process and performance. University Press. Stenou, K. (2004). UNESCO and the issue of cultural diversity: Review and strategy 1946–2004. UNESCO Publishing. Tanzplan Deutschland Jahresheft. (2009). Tanz und Archive: Perspektiven für ein kulturelles Erbe. Tanzplan Deutschland e.V. 2008, therein a.o.: Reddeker (2004), quoted by Sebillotte, Laurant: Tanz dokumentieren: Das Archiv als Mittel, pp. 26–31 Tauschek, M. (2015). Von der lokalen Kultur zum globalen Erbe. Kulturwissenschaftliche Fragen. DUK. Throsby, D. (2008). From cultural to creative industries: The specific characteristics of the creative industries. Online: http://jec.culture.fr/Throsby.doc. Last accessed 27 Jan 2021. Todd, M. E. (1937). The thinking body. A study of the balancing forces of dynamic man. Princeton Book Company. UNESCO Kommissionen (Ed.). (2009). Welterbe-Manual. Handbuch zur Umsetzung der Welterbekonvention in Deutschland, Luxemburg, Österreich und der Schweiz. Deutsche UNESCO-Kommission e.V.

References

155

UNESCO.  Intangible Cultural Heritage (2009a). Inventorying Intangible Cultural Heritage. Online: http://www.unesco.org/culture/ich/en/kit/. Last accessed 27 Jan 2021. UNESCO. Intangible Cultural Heritage. (2009b). What is Intangible Cultural Heritage? Online: http://www.unesco.org/culture/ich/en/kit/. Last accessed 27 Jan 2021. UNESCO. United Nations, UNDP & UNESCO. (2013). United Nations Creative Economy Report 2010. Online: https://unctad.org/es/system/files/official-­document/ditctab20103_en.pdf. Last accessed 27 Jan 2021. Varela, G. (2012). Genealogía política del tango Argentino. Preparado para presentar en el Congreso 2012 de la Asociación de Estudios Latinoamericanos, San Francisco. Viladrich, A. (2005). Tango immigrants in New  York City: The value of social reciprocities. Journal of Contemporary Ethnography, 5(34), S.533–S.559. Viladrich, A. (2013). More than two to tango. Argentine tango immigrants in New York City. The University of Arizona Press. Weiß, O., Vogelsänger, J., & Stuppacher, N. (Eds.). (2016). Effizientes Lernen durch Bewegung. 1. Wiener Kongress für Psychomotorik. Waxmann. Wulf, C., Göhlich, M., & Zirfas, J. (Eds.). (2001). Grundlagen des Performativen. Eine Einführung in die Zusammenhänge von Sprache, Macht und Handeln. Juventa. Zorich, D. M. (2003). A survey of digital cultural heritage initiatives and their sustainability concerns. Council on Library and Information Resources.

Platforms, Document Portals and Film Files Platforms and Portals Website of the German UNESCO Commission on Intangible Cultural Heritage at https://www. unesco.de/kultur-­und-­natur/immaterielles-­kulturerbe/ UNESCO website on intangible cultural heritage with access to documents and lists. https://ich. unesco.org/en/ Information on the German dance heritage funding projects Tanzplan and Tanzfonds at https:// www.kulturstiftung-­des-­bundes.de/cms/de/projekte/erbe_und_vermittlung/ or the direct link to the Tanzfonds website https://www.tanzfonds.de; as well as the link to the dance initiative Tanzplan Deutschland http://www.tanzplan-­deutschland.de Web presence of the Research and Science Center Institute Heritage Studies. https://heritagestudies.eu/ Website of the SAPA Foundation: https://www.sapa.swiss/ Web presence of the dance heritage project ‘The Century of Dance’ at Academy of the Arts. (2019). What the Body Remembers. On the contemporary nature of dance. Online: https:// www.adk.de/de/projekte/2019/tanzerbe/

Video Footage SAPA Foundation. Tanzspuren – Eine Oral History der Schweizer Tanzgeschichte. Online: https:// www.sapa.swiss/oral-­history/. Last access: 27 Jan 2021.