Contexts for the Hands-On Dance Project:

Chapter 2

 

(This chapter was written and presented as part of Sita Popat's PhD course.)

Introduction


From the findings presented in chapter 1, it has been concluded that theoretically the audience member has the potential to be involved 'reflectively' in the choreographic process, on the interactive Web site. Currently there are few existing Web sites that involve the participant interactively in creating dance. Through analysis of three of these sites, a model is suggested which offers a creative experience for the participant in the dance-making process.

Analysis of the Web sites indicates that the 'live' devising method of choreography is comparable in some ways to the interactive creative Web situation. This method is investigated to explore the manner in which choreographer and dancers relate to each other and apply their knowledge. The devising choreographer sets up tasks to produce movement within the constraints chosen for the piece, whilst taking advantage of the creativity of his or her dancers. Elements of this method can be applied to the interactive creative process on the Web.

Finally, the findings are presented of a pilot study carried out in preparation for practical research in this area. The pilot study questioned the possibility for involving people with little or no knowledge of dance in the dance-making process. It identified the types of knowledge or skills used by the participants. In doing this, it found that those participants with knowledge in the visual and other performing arts employed a wider range of knowledge or skills in the dance-making process. Questions are identified from this pilot study to be considered through the empirical research.
 
 

Analysis of Dance Web sites


This study is focused upon those Web sites where the participant can be interactively involved in the creative process of dance-making. A thorough search over the past six months has indicated that only five Web sites exist which fall within the parameters of this study. In order to consider the experience of the participant in the interactive Web site creation of dance, three Web sites have been selected: Stephan Koplowitz's Webbed Feats presents Bytes of Bryant Park, Richard Lord's Progressive 2, and Amanda Steggell's M@ggie's Love Bytes.1 Each has been analysed to discover if a model exists currently which offers an optimum situation in terms of the creative experience of the participant.

The analysis of M@ggie's Love Bytes in this study took place in two stages, as the piece only exists in real-time performance. Initial analysis was based on the description available on the Web site. The work was then viewed over the Internet and in the live theatre performance. The analysis has been presented in this study at both stages, as the comparison between the anticipated situation and the actual performance raised some interesting points about the interactive creative process.

The focus of this analysis is the level of creative involvement that the participant experiences in the process of dance-making.2 The study considers whether the participant can feel a sense of involvement in the process without possessing dance-specific knowledge. It asks whether an interactive dance-making Web site can provide a creative experience for people with widely varying levels of dance knowledge. The variables of interactivity and the artistic creative cycle identified in the previous chapter are employed together with interviews with selected participants for this analysis.

Interviews Used in Analysis

In order to substantiate the relevance of the above questions, five people were asked to participate in all three Web sites. They were then interviewed to determine their experiences, with emphasis on their feelings of creative involvement in the process and product. To consider the second criteria stated above, the interviewees were selected to provide a variety of backgrounds in dance knowledge and experience of using the Internet. As Webbed Feats had already taken place, the interviewees were taken to the original site and asked to participate as if the performance had not yet taken place. For M@ggie's Love Bytes the interviewees visited the Web site and listened to a description of the process, but did not see the performance.

As the only parameter under investigation in this study was the participants' creative experiences in relation to their dance knowledge, the interviewees were chosen from very similar backgrounds for consistency. All interviewees were British, Caucasian, aged between twenty-one and twenty-eight, and all attended university at undergraduate level. Interviewee A was a professional dancer/choreographer with Internet experience. Interviewee B had no dance experience, but some Internet experience. Interviewee C was a professional dancer, with very little Internet experience. Interviewee D had some dance experience, and a large amount of Internet experience. Interviewee E had no dance experience and no Internet experience.
 

Webbed Feats' Bytes of Bryant Park

The Webbed Feats performance of the piece Bytes of Bryant Park took place in 1997 in Bryant Park, New York. This piece was choreographed using ideas and stimuli provided by visitors to the Webbed Feats Web site. The Web site ran for thirteen weeks prior to the performance. Visitors to the site were invited to participate in five simple tasks. One of these was to provide some poetry or comments in response to pictures of the park, another to supply a sixty-second soap-box text on the subject of life in New York. One section required the participant to submit text for a play based on Faust, while another asked for a sentence on parks in general, and some props or instructions for four dancers. All four of these sites provided highly-structured forms, into which the participant could type responses for the appropriate sections. The fifth task involved fifteen images of a dancer in different poses, from which the participant could chose five images to be strung together. The Web site then animated those images for the participant to see what he had made. Spaces were provided for the participant to type in words for instructions on quality or a story-line. All submissions required the participant's name and email address at the bottom of the form, and were then sent at the push of a button. It was also possible to submit music, image and video files by email.

Participants whose submissions were chosen by the choreographer were notified by email and they were credited in the programme. The dance was choreographed by Stephan Koplowitz, using these submissions as stimuli. Some of the dance was improvised around them during the performance. Music submissions were combined into the original soundtrack, and images were constructed into a montage for screens in the park. The dance was performed in New York and photographs and short video clips were put onto the Web site for participants who could not attend the performance.

Webbed Feats struggles initially to involve the participant as it gives the feeling of being highly evaluative. Ideas are chosen for inclusion, and participants are notified of inclusion by email, rather like a competition or examination. The language is very technical, and can be threatening to non-dancers. Even Interviewee A, a dancer and choreographer, questioned what the Web choreographer 'wanted' and was nervous of participating.

The choreographer chose the theme of parks, which is common and familiar to all participants. However, the interviewees found it rather bland and uninspiring. They were mostly unfamiliar with the more specific themes within the piece, such as Getrude Stein and Goethe. The piece is also linked strongly to Bryant Park in New York (one task is based on knowledge of life in New York), which is alienating for participants from elsewhere. The interviewees felt greatly distanced from the dance performance, because they did not know if their work would be used, or even if it would be recognizable in the performance.

Webbed Feats requires a basic knowledge of the ways in which the Web functions, and of using of a computer mouse, as do all three Web sites. It is also necessary for the participant to have an email address. In dance terms, Webbed Feats uses an enormous amount of technical language, which some of the interviewees with little or no dance experience found threatening. However, the site only requires practical dance knowledge in the Promenade section, which offers the posed dancer figures to be sequenced into short phrases. While a knowledge of dance would make the choices more informed, and perhaps more challenging to the dancers, it is not strictly necessary in order to participate. Visual skills could equally be used in the absence of movement or dance knowledge to make decisions, or even a multi-choice method. The other sections of Webbed Feats are all in the form of written submissions as inspiration for the choreographer and dancers, and as such require reasonable literary skills but apparently no dance knowledge. However, Interviewee C, a non-dancer, was completely unable to see a connection between a written submission and the physical activity of dancing, so perhaps this assumption cannot be made.3
 

Progressive 2

Progressive 2 consists of nine small video windows in three rows of three, which are sized to fit easily within the computer screen as a group. In each of the windows a video is running of a single dancer performing in a room. All the video clips are apparently of the same dance in fragmented form, so that the dance does not flow smoothly, but misses out the transitions between movements. Fragments of the same movements appear in more than one window. Participants may stop or start the individual videos by clicking on them with the mouse, and seeing what effect each decision has on the overall screen. Instructions are not given for starting or stopping, and it is intended that participants should discover this for themselves. However, when the interviewees for this investigation participated in this dance I gave these instructions to them, as my concerns were with creative interaction in the dance-making process rather than the solving of technological problems.

In constructing the dance from the available material, all decisions are made solely by the participant and only viewed by the participant, and therefore all evaluation is intrinsic. This constructs a psychologically safe environment. Motivation varied according to knowledge of the medium amongst the participants. Interviewee E, a non-dancer, was not interested at all, and the non-dancer interviewees who were interested were largely motivated by the novelty factor. Interviewee A, as a dancer and choreographer, was motivated by interest in the movement and its presentation within the medium, but Interviewee C, a dancer, was frustrated by the lack of clarity of the dancer image. However, the interviewees all felt that motivation levels suffered from a lack of product towards which to work.

In terms of technological skills, Progressive 2 only requires mouse-clicking to participate, however it does not give instructions. The participant is left to discover this control, which requires knowledge of Web usage. However, Progressive 2 cannot be fully appreciated without at least a basic knowledge of dance form, and ideally of dance. It requires the participant to create form from the video clips provided, by stopping and starting them. But form can only be created where it can be perceived. Dance knowledge was a definite aid in this. Interviewee A, as a dancer and choreographer, was quick to note the relationships between the frames and to begin to discover unison, canon, and more complex forms. Other interviewees with less dance experience found unison, but Interviewee B and Interviewee E, who were both non-dancers, had difficulty in perceiving any relationships between the frames, and quickly became frustrated and confused. However, these skills can also come from knowledge external to dance, as shown by Interviewee B, a non-dancer, who managed to perceive simple forms such as unison, in spite of a lack of dance knowledge. By requiring some knowledge of dance, Progressive 2 risks the alienation of participants with no knowledge, and yet it offers a greater challenge to those with more knowledge.4
 

M@ggie's Love Bytes

M@ggie's Love Bytes is a real-time performance, so it is only possible to see the dance while it is actually being performed somewhere in the world. The piece consists of three female dancers in bras and knickers and carrying sink plungers, some musicians, a choreographer at a computer desk, two computer screens projected behind the dancers, a sound system and other technological aids. The performance is viewed by an audience in the performance space, and also over the Internet via a video-conferencing system. During the performance the Internet viewers may submit sound and image files which are played or projected on the screen behind the dancers. A continuous text dialogue takes place between Internet viewers, choreographer and musicians and is also displayed on the screen, along with the images of the viewers from the video-conferencing system. The atmosphere is extremely informal, and all the working, both technological and performance-based, are available for all to see. This description was the basis for the first stage of analysis, prior to the live performance.

From the description, it seems that all submissions may be used and the dancers make of them what they will in performance. Because the performance is live and performed before a wide audience, a sense of social evaluation may be present, but the extremely informal atmosphere of the situation would tend to reduce any evaluative tension. The motivation to participate seems in part to be the immediacy of response. If the participant submits material during performance then he or she is be personally involved, and can witness that involvement happening.

During the performance, M@ggie's Love Bytes assumes knowledge of how to use video conferencing software. Technological language is used in the description on the Web site, and familiarity with this is helpful although not necessary to participation. M@ggie's Love Bytes does not seem to require any dance knowledge at all, as submissions are only made in the form of inspiration to be used by the dancers and choreographer to create the dance.5

The Creative Experience of the Participant

According to the above analysis, none of the Web sites function as particularly creative experiences. Progressive 2 appears to provide supportive conditions, yet the lack of product constituted a low level of motivation for participation. Participants' involvement in the actual process of creativity was avoided in the cases of Webbed Feats and M@ggie's Love Bytes where all creation of product took place between artists and dancers, away from the participants. In Progressive 2 there were some dance or perceptual skill demands in terms of forming material, but although this attracted Interviewee A, as a dancer and choreographer, it had a negative effect on two of the interviewees who had less dance experience. However, all participants became bored quickly with Progressive 2 as there was no culmination in an end product, so the creative process was never completed. This raises issues about target audiences for interactive creative Web dance sites. The above Web site creators have not apparently managed to obtain a balance of constraints where participants with a variety of levels of dance knowledge can all participate creatively. Perhaps it is not possible to provide a creative experience on the Web for the participant who does not already possess a high level of specialist dance knowledge. Conversely, what is the justification for interactive dance creation if the average member of the Web-using public cannot participate creatively? The question of knowledge remains problematic, and will be considered later in this chapter.

To analyse the interactive experience of the participants in greater depth, the four variables of interactivity identified in the previous chapter can be applied. The variables were defined as frequency, range, and significance of the choices offered, and immediacy of response. The greater the frequency, range and significance of choice, and the more immediate the response to that choice, the more effective the interactivity is judged to be in terms of involvement of the participant in the interactive situation.

Webbed Feats allows the participant to submit as frequently as he or she wishes, but there are only five highly-structured choices of submission types. There is very little significance in those choices, as the participant does not know if his or her submission will be used. Even if the submission is used, it is likely to be unrecognizable as the piece has yet to be choreographed, and the time-delay between response and seeing the piece is prolonged. Progressive 2 allows unlimited participation, but the range is extremely limited, only permitting stopping/starting the videos. The significance is high in terms of constructing form, and the response is immediate, but the movement cannot be altered. M@ggie's Love Bytes again appears to allow high frequencies of participation, although there may not be time for all submissions to be used. The range is very open, as a variety of multimedia files can be sent. The files which participants send are described as being used directly and immediately (if submitted during a performance) as a stimulus to the dancers, which gives a strong sense of significance and immediacy of response.

Equally important, however, is the feeling of being involved in the ongoing act of creation. Webbed Feats provided a very limited feeling of participation, according to the interviewees. Text submissions are the dominant form, which were felt by all the interviewees to be very distant and removed from the choreography. Progressive 2 provides a strong sense of control as no-one else is involved, so participation is at a premium. But M@ggie's Love Bytes differs from the others in the respect that the communication between the participant and the dancers appears to be two-way. Participants communicate by submitting a multimedia file, and then seeing the dancers respond immediately via the screen. This allows the participant to send other files in reply to the dancers. The participant would appear to achieve a role similar to that of a director in the production. This direct, synchronous, two-way communication is the reason why M@ggie's Love Bytes appears to provide such a strong sense of participation.

It was established in the previous chapter that the process of art-making is specific to its context, dealing as it does with a problem-seeking and solving situation. Abbs' creative cycle was proposed as an illustration of the way in which the art-making creative process functions.

Abbs' model of the five phases of art-making:
Phase One: the impulse to create/stimulus
Phase Two: working within the medium
Phase Three: realisation of final form
Phase Four: presentation and performance
Phase Five: response and evaluation.6

The interviewees in this study were asked which Web site felt the most creative, and all of them indicated M@ggie's Love Bytes. This was an interesting response, as they were basing their decision on the description of the process, having not actually seen this Web site in action. When Abbs' creative cycle is applied to the Web sites in question, it clarifies the success of the model of M@ggie's Love Bytes, and exposes the missing features in Progressive 2 and Webbed Feats.

Progressive 2 and Webbed Feats only allow the participant to take part in the first and second phases, indeed arguably Webbed Feats never allows the participant beyond the first phase of supplying stimuli for the choreographer to begin creating. Progressive 2 does not venture beyond second phase, as no final form is ever realized. In Webbed Feats, phases two and three take place so far removed from the participant, that by the time phase four is reached, the participant will probably not even recognize his influence in it.

Only M@ggie's Love Bytes completes the cycle. The participant submits a stimulus at phase one. He or she then watches the dancers work through phases two and three, creating the material and forming it into a final product through the act of improvisation. On viewing it (phase four) the participant may then respond either in text or by submitting another stimulus. The full cycle takes place as a combination of artists and participants through synchronous, two-way communication.
 

The M@ggie's Love Bytes Performance

The above analysis was carried out using the description of M@ggie's Love Bytes given on the Web site. The following section is a description and analysis, based on the frameworks already established, of the live performance and the experience of participating in the performance over the Internet. In its failure to fulfil the promise implicit in the above analysis, it exposes problems which can inform a model for application in the empirical research.

The M@ggie's Love Bytes performance took place at The ARC Arts Centre in Stockton-on-Tees, on 23 January 1999. It was described as 'a retro-performance', as the choreographer, Amanda Steggell, had not shown this piece since 1996. Steggell opened the performance by explaining that the roots of M@ggie's Love Bytes lay in what she referred to as 'the techno-euphoria' of her early days of Internet-based work.7 It was, and remains, a daring venture into the world of Internet communications, which succeeds at least partially in involving the participant interactively in the creative process.

Throughout the performance, viewers via Internet video-conferencing took part in a discussion that was displayed in a 'chat window'. A 'chat window' is a box on the screen in which the viewers can have a conversation by typing their comments (see Figure 1). The choreographer and musicians joined in the chat, and the audience could see the chat window on the screens behind the dancers. Some of the participants had been specifically invited, and these had pre-prepared sounds or images to send as part of the performance. Steggell, as choreographer, cued these using pre-arranged words or sounds, but also received other offerings from other participants. She mixed the sounds via the equipment on her desk, and opened and closed images on the computer desktop. Steggell estimated that around fifty percent of the sound was sent by participants over the Internet at this particular performance.8

One of the greatest problems that Steggell has tried to overcome in terms of the dance, is the presentation to Internet audiences. The video-conferencing window on which the Internet viewer must watch the performance is very small with poor definition, because of the limited bandwidth available. It was only functioning at an optimum speed of four frames per second during this performance, and therefore produced very jerky, disjointed movements. To compensate, Steggell has the dancers move in a generally slow and exaggerated style, with much repetition. This aids in Internet viewing, but it is not ideal for maintaining interest for the live theatre audience members. The question could be raised here as to whether it is possible to create a performance which is viewable and interesting for both theatre and Internet audiences simultaneously.

In terms of the variables of interactivity defined in the previous chapter, certainly M@ggie's Love Bytes functions at close to optimum levels of frequency, as participants sent sounds and chatted throughout the performance. The range of possibilities was not quite as high as predicted, as the quality of sounds and images received was poor due to the software used in the performance; sounds particularly were distorted by the low bandwidth. Steggell used free video-conferencing software, which anyone can download from the Internet, as a platform to reach a wider audience. However, a more expensive set-up would have resulted in higher quality images and sounds.
 
 
 

Mr E & Mr K: if we only could hear the sound of that plunger...
m@ggie: okay arics playing his solo
m@ggie: now
m@ggie: play zogo
teteh: good blowing the horn, is this premade ?
nood@stockton: oh that was noisy!!!!!
nood@stockton: what u all doling?
Zoggo: go easy on me,. hasven't played for about 4 years ;)
Mr E & Mr K: go Aric,go
teteh: only strange noises,......can be fun though.......
Mr E & Mr K: was that zoggo playing?
m@ggie: thanku aric fior your solo
m@ggie: great sound
m@ggie: e=m talk to me
Mr E & Mr K: if music be the food of love, play on...
nood@stockton: some strange noises here atm
 
 

Sample taken from the chat window during the performance of M@ggie's Love Bytes at The ARC Arts Centre, Stockton-on-Tees,
on 23 January 1999.
 
 

Figure 1
 
 
 

Significance of actions was also not as high as predicted, as while some of the dance was improvised, large sections were pre-choreographed, with audio cues to indicate when the dancers should begin a particular section. Steggell managed those cues from her desk. This gave the dance a greater sense of form than a freely improvised session, which aided viewing over the Internet. However, it reduced the possibility for direct relationships between the sounds that were submitted by participants and the dance itself. Also, because the studio was arranged so that the dancers performed with their backs to the screen, they could not see the visual stimuli and chat window anyway. This did not seem to deter the participants. It was clear from the continuous chat window that several of the participants were feeling very much a part of the event. The requirement that the participant should feel involved is thus demonstrated.

The analysis earlier in this study, in terms of parameters for creativity, does seem to be appropriate. M@ggie's Love Bytes is indeed a very informal setting and thereby less evaluative. The motivation is in its immediacy. Technical skills in terms of technology are required, to download the correct software for viewing via the Internet. Perceptual, dance-specific technical, and personal evaluation skills are not necessary, as the participant does not take part in the choreography. Abbs' cycle of creativity also takes place as expected, with the participant taking part in phase one, watching phases two and three, and having the ability to offer even more feedback than predicted due to the continuous chat.

What was apparently not happening was any involvement of the participants in the dance itself. An interactive event in terms of chat and sharing of sounds and images was in progress very successfully. However, while many of the participants obviously enjoyed sending and commenting on the sounds (see Figure 1), no comments at all were made on the dance via the chat window. This is possibly at least partly due to the difficulty in viewing the dance via the small, slow video-feeding connections. It is also likely to relate directly to other issues raised earlier in this study: the participants probably did not have sufficient dance knowledge to be able to discuss the dance, and they were not encouraged to do so by the choreographer during the conversation. The extreme informality of the situation would have rendered any serious discussion of the dance inappropriate.

The M@ggie's Love Bytes model offers a wealth of potential for participation in the creative cycle, if rearranged so that the dance becomes a central element of the interaction. It evidently struggles with the current limitations of widely-available network connections, in terms of bandwidth and compression, which affects data size and throughput. This reduces the size, quality and speed of the video image. But perhaps it struggles more with the desire to maintain an informal atmosphere that negates a serious conversation about the dance, even if the participants do have sufficient dance knowledge to proffer unsolicited comments. The possibility is there for discussion and involvement that could be managed to suit the knowledge and perceptual abilities of each participant, through direct communication with dancers and choreographers. Through watching, listening, offering questions, comments and stimuli, those with knowledge of dance and those without could learn about dance and be involved in the creative process, and also challenge the choreographer and dancers to question their choreographic approach.
 

Conclusions for Analysis of Dance Web Sites

Interactive creativity would appear to be more concerned with everyone involved in the process working together towards the product. Interactivity that only involves communication between the human participant and the computer does not seem to have the same potential for the creative process. The completion of the creative cycle, including the sharing with others, in a totality perceivable by the participant is of greater importance. The ultimate responsibility still lies very firmly at the artist's door. If the artist has designed the overall piece well, the product of the sum of the participants' and the artist(s)'s creativity may yet become an historically-original dance work, and extend the artistic community's conceptual boundaries.

In order for participants to create, they must first have some understanding of what they are doing, otherwise their actions are based on chance alone. If they do not possess dance knowledge, then either the design of the task must provide the knowledge that they require, or it must draw on perceptual knowledge that is likely to have been gleaned from elsewhere, for example from other arts, television or nature. In both circumstances, learning will take place, either by using information gained from the example or by applying perceptual knowledge gained from life experience or other arts to the dance situation.

The M@ggie's Love Bytes model is interesting, but part of the nature of the Web is that it is global, and while some participants may be having their lunch-break, it may be midnight for others. Therefore, for purely practical purposes, the synchronous model is not ideal. Also, it does not allow the time for 'reflective' participation in the terms described in the previous chapter. The participant may need time to consider and reflect before returning with new ideas or questions. An interactive creative process that takes place over some weeks is likely to be richer in creative ideas than one that takes place over an evening.

However, without considerable knowledge of computer technology the choreographer cannot design the constraints that can support the creative process. The viewing of dance video via the Web tends to be slow and jerky due to slow connections, and downloading times can be extensive. But with the leaps in improvement of multimedia technology through demands made by the entertainment and business worlds it may not be long before these limitations are a thing of the past.
 
 

The 'Live' Devising Model of Choreography


The expansion of M@ggie's Love Bytes suggested above is remarkably similar to the process known as 'devising', where the choreographer works by involving his or her dancers in the problem-seeking and solving to find material and create a dance. In the traditional choreographic method, the choreographer uses the dancers in only the second phase of Abbs' cycle of creativity, purely as elements of the medium of dance. The movement is created by the choreographer and placed upon the dancers. In the devising model, the dancers are involved as collaborators in the process of decision-making. They are encouraged to offer suggestions, and in some cases they may generate all the movement material in response to the choreographer's instructions and their own input. The dancers are involved in the choreography in a 'reflective' role, although the choreographer remains director of the work.

This section is based upon observation of two sections of a rehearsal taken by choreographer Sandra Fisher with a group of dance students from Bretton Hall College, West Yorkshire.9 Fisher worked with the dancers to devise the piece Gatecrashin' (1999), using the dancers to generate all the material, but shaping and forming the dance herself. In the first section, Fisher required the dancers to work on a brief solo with a beer crate, and in the second the dancers combined some material which they had created previously into duets.
 

The Studio Situation

Fisher gave the dancers a beer crate each and asked for movement corresponding to the context, particularly looking at wristwatches and standing on the crate to see what others are doing. Her initial instructions were to 'play around and see what you can come up with'.10 In response the dancers mainly stepped on and off the boxes and ran around them. Fisher said that they were 'not really doing anything at all'. In response to this, Fisher placed a second set of instructions. She gave the dancers two rules. The first was that the box was very hot, so that they could not stand on it or hold it for very long. The second was that when the dancers moved off the box, they were not allowed to land on their feet. Fisher felt that the first instructions did not work. She explained 'I know what I want to see' in terms of movements and qualities, and the initial responses of the dancers did not correspond to her requirements. The second set of instructions were not qualitative in themselves, but they were designed to inspire qualitative solutions, giving an urgency and a sense of lack of control and balance. They were constraints to the movements of the dancers, and by limiting movement they required the dancers to be more ingenious in their solutions. The box was also a constraint, as it focused the dance in space. Fisher instructed the dancers that the box should be essential to the movement, so that the movement could not exist without the box being present. Fisher's verbal instructions and verbally applied constraints defined the problem so that the dancers could create and offer solutions within the required style and qualities.

When the dancers received the instructions stated above, they were each working alone, although they were all present in the space together. The main communication between them was laughter and brief comments on how each felt he or she was progressing with the task. Progress was made entirely through experimentation with the movement and its qualities, and this experimentation took place within the clear framework of Fisher's instructions.

Fisher went on to form the solos into a group section, by selecting movements from some solos to add to others, alteration of some material, grouping some into unison. She carried out all her instructions from her seat at the front of the studio, and watched the results. She constructed the section entirely visually, applying a sense of spatial awareness, complementing and contrasting movements, with an awareness of what she 'wanted it to look like'.

In the second part of the rehearsal, combining solo material to create duets, more interaction occurred between the dancers. Initially they discussed and made notes on their characters, and the interrelationship of those characters. There was much checking between groups and with Fisher to confirm the parameters within which they were working. Once the dancers began to move, the verbal interactions tended to be replaced with more movement-based ones, although there was also concern about the characters, as this affected movement qualities. These are some of the comments made:

"Can you lift me up?"
"Would it be easier to move me that way?"
"What would my character do? How would she react?"
"Where's your weight? Put it over that shoulder."
"We're just trying things out."11

These comments define the individual problems encountered by the students within the creative process, and serve to supplement the movement-based decisions that were primary. The dancers asked the questions, but if a movement solution was found then they did not analyse it verbally any further than to say 'That felt right'. Decisions in each duet were made jointly by the students. Both offered suggestions, they tried each one out and weighed them up, and then decided on the preferred solution. Solutions were chosen based on two criteria: aesthetic considerations, and contextual appropriateness. Always decisions made by the students were offered to Fisher, as choreographer, for alteration or affirmation, and there was a constant returning to her for confirmation of the constraints that she had set.
 

'Reverse Kinaesthetic Empathy' and Constraints

In dance-making, constraints are always applied in the first instance through choices made by the choreographer about the style, theme, length, number of dancers, accompaniment, and other factors. These constraints offer the potential for the initial extension of conceptual boundaries, which Boden suggests opens the possibility to create original work. These decisions are made in the first stage of Abbs' creative cycle, where the choreographer, through the impulse to create, defines the parameters of the piece. Fisher is accustomed to working within the devising process, although on this occasion she tried specifically to keep from demonstrating what she wanted in movement terms. She chose, as one of her parameters for the piece, to allow the dancers to define their characters in the narrative by developing their own movement qualities in the material. In doing this, she needed to avoid influencing their movement with her own, and so was required to work using largely verbal instruction, which she found challenging.

The movement material is formed in the second stage of Abbs' cycle, working with the medium. Here the constraints follow a different pattern. In order to work towards originality and interest in the dance, Boden's extension of conceptual boundaries remains an issue throughout the process. However, when the choreographer sets up tasks in order to generate movement material, he or she does not wish the dancers to break the constraints. The constraints are applied to shape the material, and therefore must not be exceeded or else the movement may be inappropriate to the integrity of the dance as a whole. Constraints are applied here in a similar fashion to their application in human/computer interactivity, where they cannot be broken. This indicates how interactive tasks could be appropriate to the choreographic situation particularly in the second stage of the creative cycle as defined by Abbs.

As choreographer, Fisher needed to be able to communicate her ideas clearly to ensure that the dancers' responses would be qualitatively suitable for her intentions. Usually she prefers the dancers to work from her given movement stimuli, as she describes this method as 'quicker, more precise'. Tasks for the generation and development of movement had to be set up with a great deal of precision verbally, as it is very easy for an imprecise instruction to send the dancers off at a tangent. Using verbal language as the stimuli for the movement involves a level of skill in both media.

Fisher arrived at her instructions for finding qualitative movement by applying her knowledge of dance to the search for verbal stimuli which were likely to produce the movement qualities that she required. Her experience as a choreographer allowed her to embellish on those instructions when she wanted to stimulate the dancers into further exploration. Fisher exhibits the quality necessary to the devising choreographer of 'reverse kinaesthetic empathy'. Kinaesthetic empathy is the ability to receive the communication of an emotion or sensation through perceiving movement quality. 'Reverse kinaesthetic empathy' is a term defined for this study to mean the ability to know what to communicate to the dancers to make them respond with the required movement quality. This is directly linked to the application of constraints. Fisher applied general constraints when the dancers began working with the beer crate, but then had to add other more specific constraints, to find the movement qualities that she required.
 

The 'Reflective' Approach as 'Playing and Selecting'

Although the constraints of the tasks set up by the choreographer for generating movement are not intended to be broken or extended too far, the work maintains its interest through the exploration of the full potential of those tasks. If the boundaries of the conceptual space are fixed, defined by the parameters of the task, they may nevertheless be explored fully around the borders. The dancers had to be willing to experiment and take risks with the movement to create interesting and original material with which the choreographer could work. One of the dancers used a particularly complex fall to move off the beer crate and land on the floor on his side. Another found a way to tip the beer crate over whilst still standing on it. Both these moves were interesting and offered choreographic potential beyond the level of other movements generated, but they were conceived entirely within the parameters defined. The task must be designed in such a way as to allow for the creativity of the individual within the set parameters. This may be possible within the interactive Internet task design.

These students worked easily together, and made decisions and came to a consensus of opinion easily. This could be influenced by the fact that they had worked closely together in both choreographic and social environments for over two years and they knew each other very well. They were also very familiar with the style in which Fisher was working, and with the choreographic concepts and tools that she was using. The fact that the dancers were able to use the two criteria of aesthetic and contextual appropriateness illustrated that they had knowledge which they applied during the process. Their knowledge of when something felt 'right' seems to be intuitive, and shows that their responses to the problem and its solution are largely kinaesthetic in nature, and that their knowledge is learned through experience (experiential) and internalized. The process appears to be 'reactive', in terms of the dancers finding material through experimentation. In fact it becomes 'reflective' because there is the chance to discard inappropriate material, or work with a movement idea so that it can be altered to bring out characteristics which are particularly appropriate to the theme. The opportunity 'to play and to select' are central to the 'reflective' approach. The dancers brought intuitive, experiential knowledge to bear upon the 'reflective' creative situation.

The choreographer also works 'reflectively', and largely intuitively in the construction of the piece. The knowledge that the choreographer employs in the devising process is developed through practical experience, although it can be enhanced by watching other choreographers' work and by learning about the theory of choreographic principles. The choreographer who uses largely verbal articulation of stimuli, as Fisher did in this case, must work visually to direct and construct the piece, playing with and selecting from material offered by the dancers. In terms of forming the piece from the material created by the dancers, the choreographer requires a visual understanding of the dance. However, if the choreographer is to be able to give instructions that can stimulate material from the dancers appropriate to the qualitative intention of the piece, then he or she must employ 'reverse kinaesthetic empathy'. Without the ability to know how to stimulate a particular quality or style of movement, the choreographer cannot lead the dancers in creating appropriate movement for integration into the dance.

The Relationship Between Choreographer and Dancer

The problem-seeking and solving model of artistic creativity outlined in the previous chapter can be applied to the devising process by adding the fact that between defining the problem and making the decision, the choreographer receives input from the dancers. This input is provided in response to the problem and the choreographer uses it to inform the decision. In this way the choreography is enriched, and expanded from the product of one person's experiences, movement styles and qualities to the product of many people. The sum of the creativity of the group of people is combined and unified by the choreographer's intention and decisions into the product. During the rehearsal, it was clear that flexibility of ideas and a continuous two-way flow of communication with other group members were essential qualities for both dancers and choreographer in the creative situation. There was also a need for a group understanding of the concepts behind the piece. The dancers continually referred back to Fisher for instruction and confirmation in their actions. Fisher was very clearly the guiding factor in this situation, and held the strings that would result in a unified whole, although the dancers created almost all of the movement material.
 

Conclusions for the Interactive Creative Process from the 'Live' Devising Model

Thus it can be seen that although the dancers are involved 'reflectively' in the choreographic process, the choreographer remains as the artistic coordinator of the piece. However, choreographer and dancers are involved in a permanent two-way communication that questions and confirms constantly the choreographic intention, and maintains the integrity of the dance. This is consistent with the analysis of the potential for success in the M@ggie's Love Bytes model, where communication throughout the five stages of Abbs' creative cycle is central to a sense of involvement in the creative process for participants. Necessary to 'reflective' involvement of both choreographer and dancers is the opportunity to play with and to select from material at all stages of the choreographic process.

The choreographer and the dancers together work within the constraints chosen through decisions about elements such as style and choreographic intention. But when the choreographer sets specific tasks within the creative process to generate material, those constraints become much less flexible. This is similar to computer interactive tasks in the creation of dance. However, the tasks should allow for the creativity of the individual within the parameters set. The empirical research will explore the possibilities for encouraging individual creativity within the interactive task through the practical element.

The choreographer uses movement knowledge through 'reverse kinaesthetic empathy' to find stimuli to set movement-generating tasks. In forming the material, though, the choreographer employs largely visual methods to create the dance. This has application in the interactive creation of dance with participants who may not be knowledgeable in dance. If forming is carried out through visual criteria then it may be that visual arts experience qualifies the participant to form material as well as, or perhaps better than, dance experience. Some of the tasks on the Web sites described above began to take advantage of a more visual approach, and this will be explored further in the empirical research on the research Web site, the Hands-On Dance Project, over the next year of this study.
 
 

Pilot Study for the Interactive Dance-Making Web Projects


In order initially to avoid issues of Web site design, a 'live' pilot study for the practical research Web site projects was set up to investigate the reactions of five people with little or no dance knowledge to involvement in the dance-making situation. The study had two main objectives. The first objective was to analyse the knowledge and skills employed in dance-making by people with little or no dance experience. What types of knowledge or skills did the participants employ, and did experience in the visual or other performing arts affect the types of knowledge or skills used? The second objective was to discover the reactions of the participants when faced with a dance-making situation, and whether preconceptions of dance would affect those reactions.

A third issue was also raised during the pilot study, as problems were encountered in choreographing the piece. The input from the participants contradicted each other, and the choreographer's own artistic knowledge at times. As choreographer, I was faced with decisions that questioned my role in relation to the participants. Some of the input from the participants appeared to be artistically inappropriate to the dance, and this required me to choose between the artistic integrity of the work and the creative experience of the participant.

The five participants were selected across a wide age range, on the basis of having little or no dance experience. Three of them had visual arts experience, to consider the hypothesis that this affects the choreographic process. One of them had some experience of taking dance classes. The selection covered a range of occupations. The participants are numbered one to five for reference purposes. Part of the process was repeated with a dance student as participant to compare results.
 

The Pilot Study Design

As choreographer, I worked with two final-year undergraduate dance students to create some phrases of dance movement based around the theme of meeting someone for the first time in a bar. This part of the process employed the professional devising model, and encompassed the first and early part of the second stage of Abbs' creative cycle. The dancers made one solo each and two short duets, which were recorded on video. The movement material which the dancers created used a high level of non-verbal bodily communication to try to make the work more approachable for the participants. I took the video to each of the five participants individually, and spent a twenty-minute session with each one discussing the work and asking for suggestions for ways in which the material could be developed into a dance. In this way I involved the participants only in the second stage of Abbs' cycle. The two dancers and I returned to the studio and created a short dance using the input from all five participants; the third stage of Abbs' cycle. This was also recorded on video. I showed the dance to each of the participants, completing stages four and five of Abbs' cycle, and asked questions about how they had felt about their involvement in the process.
 

Table One

Participants' Profiles

One Two Three Four Five
Age 19 28 28 69 54
Sex Female Male Female Male Female
Dance (P) Some Social Social Ballroom In youth
Dance (V) Little Little None Some None
Other Arts L M L VA L VA VA None

Dance (P) indicates experience of participating in dance.
Dance (V) indicates experience of viewing dance.
Other Arts indicates experience in one of the following:
L. = Literature, M. = Music, VA. = Visual Arts.



 
 
 
 

Table Two

Participants' Use of Knowledge/Skills in Pilot Study

One Two Three Four Five Dancer
Interpretation * * * * * *
Applying personal experience * * * * * *
Evaluation * * * * *
Movement memory * *
Perception of form * *
Reverse kinaesthetic empathy * * *
Movement selection * * * *
Elaboration *
Refinement *
Spatial awareness *

An asterisk indicates that this type of knowledge or skill was evident in the participant's responses.






Using the variables of interactivity discussed in the previous chapter to analyse the situation, the participants were able to interact with me as frequently as they wished during the twenty minute interview, and offer suggestions on any aspect of the dance. I guided them with questioning to some extent, but the conversation was flexible in its structure. The significance was a more difficult factor, as they only had my word that their suggestions would be incorporated into the dance. Immediacy of response was good through the medium of face-to-face discussion, but the video could not be altered so the participants had to wait to see the final piece.

I chose not to bring the participants into the studio with the dancers, although this would have improved the variables of significance and immediacy of response. Firstly, I was aware that the participants would probably lack movement memory skills, and working in the live situation would require them to watch and remember the dancers' movements in order to discuss the dance. The video allowed for viewing as many times as required by the participant, using the playback controls to select particular sections for discussion. Secondly, I was concerned that a group meeting in the dance studio would be a threatening situation for the participants. The Web provides distance in both time and space from those perceived as knowledgeable, and this can be viewed as a safety factor where the participant may feel unsure through lack of knowledge. One-to-one discussion also provided the chance for the participant to be involved in a more reflective manner, when we could discuss the dance without the pressure of having to also work with the dancers. For reasons of providing a secure situation I took notes, but did not record the interviews. All participants expressed their appreciation of this secure environment, thus stressing the importance of the one-to-one privacy of the Web as a protecting feature in this process.
 

Participants' General Responses

All participants were initially told about the stimulus for the dance, of meeting someone for the first time in a bar. They were then shown the video, and asked for words which would describe the qualities of the movement. Only Participants One and Two offered words that related to the qualities (flowing, graceful, angular). All the participants provided interpretations of the movement (shy, aloof, frightened), although Participant Five found this difficult. All participants tended to see the dance phrases as completed works. Whilst feeling able to offer interpretations and evaluations (see Table Two), they struggled to select individual movements which could be elaborated, or discuss how a longer dance might be structured from the current material. All participants expressed concern about their lack of dance-specific vocabulary. All asked questions about appropriate terminology during the discussions. Participants Two, Three and Five were nervous about participating in a dance-related activity, even though they were not required to dance.

Interpretations were similar from Participants One, Two, Three and Four. However evaluations were varied. The two dancers in the piece had taken on opposing characters. One was extremely reserved and shy, whilst the other was very extrovert and flirty. Participant Three was quite clear that the dance was inaccurate because nobody would ever be that flirty on a first meeting, while Participant Two felt that the first dancer was too reserved. From having seen both these participants in a social setting, I am aware that they have tended to be biased in their evaluations towards their own natural ways of communicating socially. Here their personal experiences of life are influencing directly their interpretation of the art work. These two participants are of similar ages and from within the same culture. On the Web there will be a greater variety of socio-cultural backgrounds and life experiences, so divergence of understandings and evaluation will be greater. Choice of themes for dances created on the Web must reflect this diversity by being flexible to a variety of interpretations.
 

Specific Knowledge or Skills Exhibited by the Participants

(See Table Two)

Participant One responded freely to relatively little questioning. She seemed able to identify movement qualities and relationships between the dancers. She drew on personal experiences of being in a club, but was able to recognized and accept the dance interpretation as an abstracted version of what might really happen. She needed a great deal of affirmation as we spoke, and asked if it was appropriate to use music terminology as she was familiar with it. When asked for suggestions on how to combine the solos in the dance, she was able to remember that the first solo appeared to be responding to movements in the second solo, and suggested that the second solo started and the first solo came in part of the way through. This indicated that she was able to remember movements after she had seen them. One of the skills developed in dance class is the ability to remember the exercises as they are taught, and as this movement memory was only exhibited by Participant One it seems that this skill may be linked to her knowledge gained from practical classes. If movement memory is a skill which can only be learnt from practical dance experience, then the design of the Web site must take this into account for non-dancers.

Participants Two, Three and Four showed particular awareness of form. All three of these participants have extensive experience in the arts. All are experienced in the visual arts, which provide an awareness of form in space, and Participants Two and Three have experience of literature. Participant Two is also a musician. Participant Two selected movements and qualities which he felt were particularly important in expressing the theme. One of the dancers folded her arms, and Participant Two chose that movement as being important. He also expressed a preference for the flowing movements of one of the dancers, suggesting that she should keep that quality throughout.

Participant Three was very clear about the relationships between the dancers and her interpretations of the movements. She looked for consistency through the movement quality, suggesting that the first duet needed to be more fluid to link with the solo material. She wanted a section between the solos and the duets, showing an interim stage where the dancers became closer, 'breaking through barriers'. This indicates an ability to perceive form in the structure of the work. She said that she would like to see the dancers throwing themselves into something and then stopping, to illustrate how social conventions and inhibitions might interfere with meeting someone to whom you are attracted. In this description she shows a level of reverse kinaesthetic empathy, by giving instructions to the dancers which she thinks will generate movement to illustrate the theme. She also liked the stillness that existed in the dance: 'Sometimes in a dance it has more impact when they're just still, especially after a lot of movement'. When questioned if she had noticed this from watching dance, she replied that she had thought of it by applying the idea of silence in music or a pause in literature. Although the movement selected is stillness, it is still definable as movement selection.

Participant Four wanted the shy soloist to use more upright movement, rather than on the floor, to make her a little more extrovert. This illustrates a level of reverse kinaesthetic empathy, in the same manner as Participant Three. He also selected movements that he felt were particularly appropriate to the theme. He chose the lift in the first duet, in which one dancer places her shoulder under the arm of the other dancer and lifts. Participant Four saw this movement as a fitting together of the two bodies which was equivalent to the fitting together of the people in friendship. He suggested, in response to questions about the ending of the piece, that lifts like this should be used to show friendship as an ending. He described shape as being very important to him, as a visual artist, in terms of both position and quality. Participant Four also used his hands on one occasion to indicate qualities of movement, showing kinetic awareness.

To complete Abbs' creative cycle, Participants One, Two, Three and Four were all shown the dance which had resulted from their participation. Participants One, Two, and Three all said that they felt that they had been involved in the making of the dance, and they could see elements of their input in the piece. Participant Four did not feel any connection with the dance, and could see nothing of his input. However he expressed interest in being involved in the project on the Web site, with the comment 'if you feel I am capable of it'. Even though he had exhibited knowledge that enabled him to take part and had been able to make comments clearly during the process, he still felt that he was disempowered in the dance context, through his conception of his lack of dance-specific knowledge.
 

Participant Five - Preconceptions which Interfere with Creativity

Participant Five approached this exercise with a great deal of trepidation. She said that she did not like ballet or contemporary dance because it was too 'academic' for her. She explained 'I like to identify what it is'. She was decidedly uncomfortable inspite of all efforts to put her at ease. She felt that she needed to find an interpretation for every gesture made by the dancers, and quickly became confused. She identified one gesture of reaching out and snatching the hand back as 'stealing something', and was concerned because she could not make any other movements fit with this interpretation. When encouraged and requested to look for more general qualities and feelings she used the terms 'quick, slow, jerky, aggressive, graceful'. This interview terminated in only ten minutes because the participant did not wish to continue. She expressed no evaluative statements during the interview, and said that she was not particularly interested in seeing the final dance product.

Yet at the end of the interview, after discussing what might happen next in the dance, Participant Five was just leaving when she declared 'I don't know - it looks like animals getting to know each other.' In this declaration, she suddenly leapt from struggling to interpret every movement, to an intuitive, and creative, interpretation of the whole. In terms of Boden's extension of conceptual spaces, Participant Five had moved from the interpretation of the piece which she had been given (two people meeting in a bar) to a concept of her own which was remarkably apt. This interpretation had not been hinted at in our conversation, and stemmed entirely from her perception of the movement as similar to the play of young animals which she had seen on television. She had recognized qualities that she could not name, and drawn from her experience of life to provide an interpretation. Yet she had no faith in her creative act, as she felt that it was inappropriate to the situation. She was applying her preconceptions of dance as 'academic', and how she did not understand it and disliked it. In doing so, she was preventing herself from actually perceiving the dance, until she felt that she was leaving that framework.

In illustrating this ability to be highly creative in her interpretation, whilst believing that she knew nothing about dance, Participant Five showed that while she is capable of being involved in dance-making in terms of implicit skills, her own preconceptions of dance render her incapable. The presentation of dance on the Web site will be critical in overcoming a whole range of possible dance preconceptions of potential participants.
 

The Dance Student

In order to investigate how much could actually be achieved in terms of participation in dance-making using the video, a dance student took part in the same process as the other participants. She exhibited at a far broader level all the skills shown by the other participants, in terms of interpretation, selection of movement and movement qualities, perception of form, reverse kinaesthetic empathy, and application of personal experience. In addition she also offered spatial awareness, suggestions for elaborating and refining movement. She also gave a lighting design, costume suggestions, and two alternative endings. She worked much more comfortably with ideas of abstraction, and she used movements of her hands to indicate qualities, spatial arrangements and movements. Comments such as 'I can see it like this...' illustrated that the dance student could construct the dance in her mind to try out possibilities. Although all the participants could take part through the various knowledges and skills which they possessed from elsewhere, it was clear that the dance student, with dance-specific knowledge and skills was considerably more able to participate fully in the dance creation.
 

The Challenge to the Choreographer

After collecting the input of the participants, the two dancers and I worked to create a short dance from it. We struggled, because even with only five participants, the interpretations were varied. The movements which participants had selected specifically were all repeated or elaborated, and the comments from Participant Three caused us to create a new section between the solos and duets. However, because generally the solos had been accepted as they stood, we changed very little. In the duets, we worked with the idea of pursuer and pursued which had been suggested by Participants Three and Four.

When we came to create an end section, Participants One, Two and Four had all suggested unison to show a happy ending. We faced a dichotomy of shying away from such a clich*d finish, but accepting the majority vote. We tried working in unison, and finally I made an artistic decision as choreographer to over-rule the vote. We used some unison, but also combined variations of material from earlier sections. This was a difficult decision to make, because the aim is to involve the participants as much as possible. However, it is similar to the 'live' devising model, where the choreographer makes the final decisions in the artistic process. The participant with less dance knowledge is likely to tend towards the more obvious solution to problems. His or her conceptual space is reduced in size through lack of knowledge, and he or she is not so inclined to explore the edges, as the middle is still relatively new territory. If the product is to be of interest to the dance community then it requires the choreographer to make some decisions based on the larger conceptual space, whilst taking into account the opinions of all participants. To find the balance between these sometimes opposing factors is a great challenge to the choreographer.

Within the definition of art-making as qualitative problem-solving, the participants seemed often to be posing qualitative problems through their suggestions, rather than helping to solve them, although the posing of some solved others. The dance student's suggestions, by contrast, offered mostly solutions. I still employed many choreographic tools and methods, using techniques of selection and elaboration of movement and phrases, and motif repetition and development. However, I was guided, and challenged, in selection, intention and narrative by the comments of the participants. This was a potentially enriching experience, making me reflect on possible solutions, and possible reader interpretations that I might never have considered. It made me far more aware of the processes that I utilized in the choreography.
 
 

Identification of the Parameters for Empirical Research


Through analysis of the current scope of interactive Web sites that involve the participant in creating dance, it was seen that involvement in the whole creative process, with a two-way communication between those involved, is very important to the participant's creative experience. The M@ggie's Love Bytes model has positive aspects, through its levels of interactivity and completion of Abbs' creative cycle, but its informality causes the participant not to focus upon the dance. A re-working of the model with a greater focus on the dance might be a possible guide for further projects. The immediacy of interaction implies a strong feeling of being involved in the on-going process for the participant. However, inspite of the advantages, immediacy could be seen as detrimental, since the participant cannot be involved in a 'reflective' manner. Synchronous involvement remains at the 'reactive' level of theatre-based audience interaction. Asynchronous involvement allows time for reflection which results in a more objective and considered response. The asynchronous version of this model could be seen as very similar to the 'live' devising model of choreography.

In the devising model, the choreographer uses the dancers to generate movement material and offer suggestions, generally in the role of problem-solvers, while she both seeks for and solves problems. In order to generate movement, the choreographer sets tasks for the dancers that delineate the parameters within which the movement must be created. In this way, the movement will be appropriate to the artistic unity of the piece. The relatively fixed constraints which are applied by the choreographer in movement generating tasks could be seen as similar to the way in which computer interactive tasks work. The choreographer requires the dancer to explore the conceptual spaces within the constraints, and be as creative as possible within those constraints, without pushing or breaking them. The dancers are applying their movement skills, together with choreographic knowledge gained from movement experience. The choreographer must apply visual forming skills, but also reverse kinaesthetic awareness. Therefore the choreographer must also have movement knowledge to know which qualitative instructions will produce the movement required.

The pilot study for the Web-based practical research project employed a similar method to the 'live' devising model, although all the interactivity took place through verbal discussion, suggestions and comments. Problems were found in the area of preconceptions of dance, which in some cases prevented people from participating or feeling that they were participating, even when they showed evidence of sufficient skills and knowledge to be able to positively influence the process. A variety of knowledge and skills were applied by the participants, but it was noticeable that those with experience in the arts, and particularly the visual arts, tended to show evidence of a wider range of knowledge and skills.

Some specific issues have been raised in these analyses, which will be addressed via Project One on the Hands-On Dance Project research Web site. The design of the projects will attempt to provide sufficient flexibility to be able to positively involve participants from all types of dance background, including none at all. In doing this, tasks will provide a variety of approaches, including some which deal specifically with skills which are not necessarily dance-based, such as forming. The types of participants in the Dance Projects, in terms of dance knowledge and experience, will be researched via questionnaires and interviews. The choreographer's relationship with the participants will be examined, including the challenges of coping with large numbers of submissions which may be conflicting in nature.

Dance is a minority art form, which non-initiates often find difficult to understand, as the participants in the pilot study made apparent. The interactive dance-making process via the Web challenges the choreographer to meet the creative needs of people who wish to participate, but who have little knowledge of dance. Their conceptual spaces in dance will be small, although they may be extended by knowledge in other areas. Nevertheless, the choreographer must ensure that these participants feel that their contributions are valued. At the same time, the choreographer must design the process to be interesting to those more educated members of the dance community who are participating, so that they can be involved in a way which allows them to challenge their own conceptual spaces. The dance product created in this manner also needs to be approachable whilst extending sufficiently into the larger conceptual space to be of interest to dance specialists. This is a challenge that will offer insight into the whole field of professional dance performance, and how it can maintain its integrity as art, but become more attractive to a wider audience.
 
 
 

Notes

1 Stephan Koplowitz's Webbed Feats can be found at http://www.webbedfeats.org/prod/home.html.
Richard Lord's Progressive 2 can be found at http://www.bigroom.co.uk/edances/index.html.
Amanda Steggell's M@ggie's Love Bytes can be found at http://www.notam.uio.no/~amandajs.
2 It must be stressed that the specific aims of the individual artists who have constructed these Web sites differ from each other and from the purposes of this study.
3 This analysis is based on the concerns of this study. For further information on the intentions of the choreographer, Stephan Koplowitz, see the interviews on the Webbed Feats Web site.
4 This analysis is based on the concerns of this study. Further information and additional Web dances can be found on Richard Lord's Web site, The Big Room http://www.bigroom.co.uk/.
5 This analysis is based on the concerns of this study. Further details of the M@ggie's Love Bytes project can be found on the Motherboard Web site http://www.notam.uio.no/motherboard/.
6 P. Abbs, The Pattern of Art-Making, in ed. by P. Abbs, The Symbolic Order: A Contemporary Reader on the Arts Debate, (London: Falmer Press, 1989), p. 204.
7 M@ggie's Love Bytes performance, The ARC Arts Centre, Stockton-on-Tees, on 23 January 1999. Pre-performance talk given by Amanda Steggell.
8 M@ggie's Love Bytes performance as Note 7, post-performance discussion with Amanda Steggell.
9 Sandra Fisher is a freelance choreographer and was also a lecturer at Bretton Hall College when Gatecrashin' (1999) was made. She worked with a group of 13 final-year undergraduate dance students over a period of 6 weeks. The referenced rehearsal took place on 21 January 1999.
10 All quotes in this section are taken from an interview with Fisher on 5 March 1999.
11 Quotes from students during the rehearsal with Fisher on 21 January 1999 (see Note 9).

Return to Hands-On Dance Project - Research