I am relatively new to Twitter but I have already enjoyed the relationships I have started to cultivate and the dialogue they have inspired.
One of the threads we’ve created is the comparison of contemporary dance to modern (look for #comodance). I have biases. Know this. But also know that while I consider myself a modern dance artist, my roots are firm in the jazz idiom. Allow me to clarify: Jazz created by people that were investigating the possibilities of the body with applied theory and clear purpose. Jazz dance that actually related to jazz music and shared rhythms and the percussive qualities that resulted in those rhythms. Jazz that sculpted space as well as the body. Jazz choreography that was new each time based on the music, the lines, the feel for the piece. Jazz artists branded their styles yet offered unique perspectives with new works and demonstrated a development of an idea, a motif, and strong movement selection. In these ways, artists working in jazz were working as deeply and as intellectually, I think, as many modern dance artists- which were then often using the term “contemporary”. Yet, the “contemporary dance” of Martha Graham is nothing like the “contemporary dance” being presented current day on shows such as Fox’s So You Think You Can Dance.
I will be the first to admit that modern dance, like jazz, has suffered an immense departure from its origins that so clearly identified its belonging in the dance world; like it or not. I will also be the first to propose that we need a revision ( a RE- VISION) in order to perpetuate this idiom into the future. But the same goes for all dance idioms, wouldn’t you say? Wasn’t there huge discussion about six months ago about whether or not ballet is dead? The same could be debated about modern (also touched on in the #comodance thread). I have some theories as to HOW this might be done but they need some refinement before I share. I also have some theories as to how all of this should relate to dance education but I am also not ready to show those cards. For now, I will keep them close to my jazz vest (of which I wore A LOT in my jazz days. 😉 )
Okay, so here goes. My attempt to fairly explain contemporary dance to the non-dancer. Gulp.
- Contemporary dance is a category of dance which borrows movement from the disciplines of ballet, modern, and jazz dance and places an emphasis on virtuosic athleticism.
- Contemporary choreography often demonstrates one of two themes: direct/indirect narrative or movement for movement sake yet both approaches are usually dependent upon musical selection and often rooted in popular culture references.
- As in everything, there is good and bad. Contemporary dance aspires to be aesthetically beautiful or aesthetically ugly, relying on body rather than embodiment to make the concept clear.
What do you think? I chose my words carefully…..
Here is a brief list of contrasting ideas that may provoke further thought regarding the differences between modern dance and contemporary. This is not to say these concepts don’t exist in both classifications, these are just general comments to the trends I see in them separately.
Re-Creation of Mvt (embodiment ) Imitation of Mvt (line/shape)
Again, what do you think?
If you are interested in joining the conversations about dance online, check out Jordon Cloud’s recent post here and “like” the Terpsichore: Movement as Muse on FB here. Also check out this article by Nancy Wozny on this very topic!!