Minutes for the Open Theory Meeting, October 20, 2011

Submitted by Charlotte Wile - January 18, 2012

Following are minutes for the DNB Open Theory Meeting held on October 20, 2011. The minutes were written by Charlotte Wile.

Present: Janos Fugedi, Bill Kiley, Mei-Chen Lu, Mira Kim, Gabor Misi, Lynne Weber, and Charlotte Wile.

The meeting was conducted via Skype. Janos and Misi were in Hungary. Bill, Mei, Mira, Lynne, and Charlotte were in New York.

 

TOPICS

The topics for this meeting were papers that Misi and Janos presented at the August 2011 ICKL conference in Budapest, Hungary:

1) Gabor Misi, “Interpretations of the Placement of the Feet.”

2) Janos Fugedi, “Dancers’ Perception of Movement Rhythm.” 

TOPIC #1: Gabor Misi’s paper, “Interpretations of the Placement of the Feet.” 

1.1    Misi’s paper “Interpretations of the Placement of the Feet” describes inconsistencies in the rules for certain groups of symbols that depict the placement of feet. These indications mean different things to Albert Knust, Maria Szentpal, and Ann Hutchinson. 

1.2     Our discussion of the paper began with Janos telling us about Maria Szentpal, who is cited extensively in both Misi’s and Janos’s papers. In the video clip below, Janos talks about the major role Maria had in the development of our notation system. Misi is sitting next to him. (The clip was extracted from a video we made at the meeting to document the conference call.)

1.3    [Maria’s English and Hungarian manuscripts that Janos refers to (see minute 2:50 on the video) are available for research on the premises of the DNB library.]

1.4   The group first examined examples K1 and F1 in Misi’s paper (page 2). The examples are copied here below.

1.5   Misi uses K1 and F1 to compare Maria’s and Ann’s methods for determining the distance of a normal step:

•  Maria says the distance of a step is measured from one foot to the other foot. The normal distance is one foot length between the supporting feet, i.e., three squares in F1.

• Ann says the distance of a step is measured from the heal of one foot to the heal of the next foot.  Thus, the the normal distance is two foot lengths, i.e., 6 squares in F1.

1.6   However, regardless of which of these definitions you use to interpret K1,  the resulting movement will be the same (F1).

1.7    Charlotte wondered if the way distance is judged affects the way the movement feels or is executed. For example, in everyday pedestrian walking she would find it easier to think about the distance between the feet, i.e., from the toe of one foot to the heal of the other foot (Maria’s method).

1.8    Mira said she understood what Charlotte said about the feeling of the movement, but, as Misi brings out later in his paper, there are reasons Ann uses the heal to heal definition.  

1.9    Janos said that the feeling of distance in a step is different depending upon the context of the movement. For example, it might be different if you are on your toes and step to the side, or if you are doing various dance steps.

1.10    Mei said that the “normal" distance can vary. For example, a normal step for an older person might be smaller than what is normal for a younger person. However, it is important to have a clear definition of what "normal" means in Labanotation.

1.11    Charlotte said that in the L/N texts Ann provides two ways of notating. In one method, the measurement signs used to indicate the size of a step represent an approximate amount. In the other method, the signs depict an exact amount. The exact amount is relative to the mover’s foot size.

1.12    Misi pointed out that in Ann’s definition, the measurement can be from the center of one foot to the center of the other foot, as well as from the heel of one foot to the heel of the other [see paragraph 2.6 in Misi’s paper].

1.13  Charlotte asked if it matters whether the analysis is “from the center to the center” or the “heel to the heel,” since the distance of the step would in both cases be two foot lengths.

1.14    Misi replied that it doesn’t matter if your feet are parallel [as in K1 above.] However, if your feet are rotated, the analysis is affected [as is discussed later in his paper].

1.15    The topic veered to what one thinks about when taking a step; the feet or the center of weight.

1.16    Charlotte talked about her experience teaching very young children. If they take small steps they would probably think about the distance between the feet.

1.17    Janos said in performing traditional Hungarian dances he would probably not think about the center of weight or the feet. Rather he would just think about expression of the movement. The distance he moves would serve the expression. 

1.18    Mei said that what you focus on depends upon your training and the dance style. When she walks down the street she doesn’t think about the feet or the center of weight. She just walks.

1.19    Charlotte: What if I say to you, “Take little steps while you walk.”

1.20    Lynne: I probably would think about my feet.

1.21    Charlotte: What about taking tiny steps in a bourree?

1.22    Mei: You would think about moving the feet and the pelvis together. In modern dance you would think more about your center of weight.

1.23    Charlotte: In our system of notating we indicate the distance of a step by showing the situation of the feet. In situations where the intent is about moving the center of weight a certain distance, maybe we should be including that in the notation.

1.24    Next we discussed examples K2, F2a, and F2b in Misi’s paper (page 3). Example F2a shows how Maria would interpret K2. Example F2b shows how Sheila Marion would interpret K2.

1.25    The examples are copied here below.

1.26    Mira and Mei said they would interpret K2 as in F2a.

1.27    Lynne said that is what you would normally think if you had ballet training.

1.28    Mira: If you are standing on one foot, where is “place”?  If I put my center of gravity nearer the toe I feel like I’m falling. Rather, place is where the heel is. Likewise, in a turned out first position, place is between the heels.

1.29    Mira showed a movement in which she stepped in place onto the ball of her left foot (both feet were parallel). She said the movement feels more stable if the left foot is placed near the heal of the right foot rather than near the toe or center of the right foot.

1.30    Post-meeting Charlotte photographed herself replicating Mira’s movement.

1.31    Charlotte asked Misi about the reference for F2b. In paragraph 3.5 in his paper, Misi says the example comes from Sheila Marion. Charlotte wondered if Ann has stated anywhere how she would interpret K2. As far as Charlotte could tell, Ann does not address this issue in the L/N texts.

1.32    Misi said that Ann and Maria would both interpret K2 as in F2a. In this case the contrasting interpretation (F2b) comes from Sheila Marion in a paper she wrote for ICKL in 1979.

1.33    Charlotte wondered if Sheila knew when she wrote her 1979 paper that she was disagreeing with Ann’s and Maria’s interpretation.

1.34    Janos: Sheila was reverting to a former rule in which the reference point in the case of positions is the center of the foot.

1.35    Janos gave some more information about Maria’s analysis. He said he had discussed the topic of step distance with Maria many times. Maria said the problem is we are not elephants with round feet. If our feet were round it would be much easier to define the relationship of the legs. Unfortunately, the length of a human foot is three times longer than its width, and this is what causes the problem. To deal with this in notation, Maria envisioned the foot as having a circle around its heel. That circular shape becomes the reference point.

1.36    To illustrate, Janos showed us the drawing below.
 

1.37    Next the group discussed examples K3, F3a, and F3b in Misi's paper (page 4), copied here below.

1.38    In Maria’s interpretation, the ball of the left foot touches near the toe of the right foot, as in F3a. In Ann’s interpretation the foot touches near the heal, as in F3b.

1.39    Lynne said she would interpret K3 with the ball of her left foot next to the center of the right foot (i.e., between F3a, and F3b).

1.40    Janos asked Lynne how she would interpret K3 if the heal was touching (rather than the ball of the foot).

1.41    Lynne replied she would probably also touch near the center.

1.42    Janos said Maria’s rule was that it doesn’t matter which part of the foot touches (e.g., the ball or the heal). The placement of the foot should be determined according to where foot would be normally when the whole foot touches [see paragraph 4.5 in Misi’s paper].

1.43    Misi pointed out that if the ball of the foot touches near the center or the heal of the other foot, and then you roll to the whole foot, you end up with one foot more forward than the other. This is a reason for using Maria’s rule.

1.44    Post-meeting, Charlotte made the video below to illustrate rolling variations: near the toe, near the center of the foot, and near the heal.

1.45    Mira said that where the movement ends affects the analysis of the movement. For instance, in a rolling movement you end on the whole foot. The body knows that you will end on both feet and you naturally place the foot so the feet will end up next to each other. However, in K3 there is a different sensation. The ending position is on the ball of the foot. Thinking about what would happen if the foot were to roll is not relevant.

1.46    Charlotte: This brings up the issue of what criteria should be used in creating rules. Should they support the feeling of the movement, or should they be based on what would make the fewest or easiest to remember rules?

1.47    Mira wondered about the examples given in Misi’s appendix (page 13) shown here below. In the Hutchinson-Kolff  “4.6 paragraph” example, the touching is near the heal. What rule does the Sheila Marion use in the rolling “4.8 paragraph”?

1.48  Misi said that in the “4.8 paragraph” example Sheila used a caret to avoid the rolling problem. The caret says the touch is preparatory.

1.49    Janos said that ICKL called the caret used in this way a “forward reference.”

1.50    Charlotte understood this to mean that in the “4.8 paragraph” example, the caret tells you to judge the location of the right foot touch according to where the foot will be in its subsequent support.

1.51    Mira wondered if Sheila’s “3.5 paragraph” example conflicts with her “4.8 paragraph” example (see page 13 in Misi’s paper). The “3.5 paragraph” example implies that Sheila's reference for the foot placement is center.

1.52    Regrettably, we needed to stop discussing Misi’s paper at this point in order to leave enough time for Janos’s paper.  

TOPIC #2:  Janos Fugedi’s, “Dancers’ Perception of Movement Rhythm.”

2.1    Janos’s “Dancers’s Perception of Movement Rhythm” is a PowerPoint paper which describes his research into the perception and notation of timing.

2.2   The PowerPoint begins with a summary of Janos Fugedi and Gabor Misi, “Ways of Notating Floor Touching Gestures with the Foot” (ICKL 2009), which compared four different methods of notating timing: exact (Knust), mixed (Szentpál), unit (Hutchinson), and rhythm expressive (Fügedi and Misi).

2.3    The PowerPoint then goes on to describe an experiment Janos conducted with his students. His hypothesis was that “movement rhythm is represented in our mind as if it was ‘mind-notated’ in unit timing.” To test his hypothesis, the students watched short films of traditional Hungarian dances. They recorded the timing of the movement using a special task sheet.

2.4    Janos first showed us the films. The video below, which was extracted from the video we made of the conference call, contains the films. Charlotte inserted the titles.  In the video only some of the music accompanying the dances is audible. [For a larger image, click "You Tube" on the bottom right.]

2.5    In the experiment each student recorded the rhythm of each film using horizontal lines on a horizontal staff, as instructed on the task sheet shown here below (see page 19 in the PowerPoint). [Click the image to make it larger.]

2.6     Examples of the students' responses are given in the PowerPoint on pages 20-21. A sample is shown here below. 

2.7    Fifty two students participated in the experiment. All of them were dancers. Some had a L/N background and some did not. In any case, their task did not involve L/N. Rather they were just asked to use horizontal lines to depict when movements in various body portions begin and end.

2.8    The results of the experiment are documented and analyzed on pages 22-34 in the PowerPoint. On page 22 Janos shows the different ways the students drew the lines on the task sheets.  Janos found that of 98% of their drawings corresponded with a unit or unit-like perception of rhythm (page 34 in the PowerPoint).

2.9    Charlotte speculated that the results may demonstrate that it is easier to understand and record unit timing.

2.10    Janos corrected Charlotte. He said that exact timing is no more difficult to learn than unit timing. He feels that the subjects in the experiment mainly used unit or unit-like timing to record their observations because that is the way they they intrinsically understand timing. The results of the experiment support his experience in teaching L/N for more than 20 years. Even though his students are taught both exact and unit timing, they most always choose to notate using unit timing.

2.11    Charlotte asked if the students taking the experiment knew that Janos was testing their perception of timing. Janos said they did not know the purpose of the experiment.

2.12    Mei said if she had participated in the experiment before she had L/N training, she probably would have draw the “unit-like” lines which are not clear about where the movement begins (see page 22 in the Power Point). In other words, she would have drawn the lines a little after the beat.

2.13    Janos said it is important in discussing these issues to keep in mind a dancer's training. The way you are taught movement affects the way you perceive rhythm. This understanding of rhythm is not conscious. It is during the teaching process that you get your built in sense of rhythm. He feels that in all the dance styles that stem from traditional forms, such as folk dance, tap dance, ball room dance, and Latin dance, the perception of rhythm tends to correspond with the “unit timing” method of notation.

2.14    Mei and Charlotte wondered if it might be useful to do the experiment with ballet or modern dancers.

2.15    Charlotte said she would be curious to know if unit timing or exact timing is used most in L/N scores. Regardless of which method notators might say in theory they feel works best, which one do they actually use in practice when they notate scores?

2.16    Janos said that is a good question. He thinks they use both. Generally they use unit timing, but they may switch to exact timing to notate touching. However, there are notators who mainly use specific timing. For example, Judy Van Zile uses it extensively and consistently in her notation of certain Asian dances.

2.17    Charlotte gave the example of Mickey Topaz’s score for “Day on Earth,” which uses both unit timing and exact timing for touches. Some people might say that this is not a problem because the context of the notation lets you know how it should be interpreted. However, Charlotte thinks that if you are doing a close reading of the notation, the mixture of exact and unit timing can be confusing.

2.18    Mei said arguments can be made for each method of writing, but when conflicting systems are used in the same score, the notation becomes very hard to read.

2.19    Charlotte wondered which timing method should be emphasized in our texts and in our teaching.

2.20    At this point it was time for the meeting to end. We all felt we had made a good start in our examination of Misi’s and Janos’s excellent papers, but there is so much more in them we would like to discuss. We decided we should continue at the next meeting.

Call for Manuscripts

Submitted by Billie Lepczyk, October 22, 2011

Call for Manuscripts

Dance: Current Selected Research

Volume VIII

Edited by:

Lynnette Young Overby, Ph.D. and Billie Lepczyk, Ed.D., CMA

We are preparing the 8th volume of Dance: Current Selected Research. Criteria for the consideration of manuscripts: (1) original research on topics for which valid techniques in experimental, historical, ethnographic, movement analysis, or clinical research have been applied in the collectionof data and with appropriate analytical treatment of data; (2) state-of-the art research reviews on topics of current interest with a substantial research literature base, or (3) theoretical papers presenting well formulated but as yet untested models.

Deadline: February 10, 2012

Guide to Authors

1. The selection is required to be in English and should not have been published exactly in its present form elsewhere. However, it is satisfactory if the paper has been presented at a professional meeting and/or appears in abstract only. 

2. Submit one copy of the manuscript in a Word document (.doc or.docx) to both editors by e-mail. Submissions must include the lead author’s address, telephone number, e-mail address, title, and professional affiliation. The manuscript order is: (1) title page, (2) blind title page, (3) abstract, (4) text, (5) references, (6) author notes, (7) footnotes, (8) tables, (9) figure captions, and (10) figures.

3. The submitted manuscript is required to be typed on 8.5 x 11 inch paper with 1 inch margins on all sides and text in 12 font Times.

4. The submitted manuscript is required to be no more than 9,000 words (approximately 25 manuscript pages) in length.

5. Include an abstract of not more than 200 words.

6. The APA reference and citation system (6th edition) should be used for all manuscripts.

7. Illustrations, charts, etc. should be submitted in “camera ready” condition apart from the text. Indicated exactly where this material should be inserted.

8. In addition to the editors, the papers will be evaluated by at least two outside reviewers for consideration for publication.

9. For each contribution selected for publication the author will receive one copy of the book.

10. Deadline for submitting manuscripts is February 10, 2012

Dr. Lynnette Young Overby, Co-Editor

Dance: Current Selected Research

Office of Undergraduate Research & Experiential Learning

180 S. College Ave.

University of Delaware

Newark, DE 19350

302-831-7064

302-831-3698

Email: overbyl@udel.edu, lepczyk@vt.edu

Submit your manuscript to both editors

Choice on Dance: Current Selected Research Volume 3

“This serial presents an ideal way for beginning dance majors to become aware of dance research. For this third volume as for past ones (1989, 1990), editors Overby and Humphrey have selected articles reflecting research across the dance spectrum including dance education, history, kinesiology, and ethnology. These articles are useful not only for their content but also as examples of research methods within each area…it is quite possible that this and future volumes will show up on reading lists in general dance research courses; for that reason this publication is recommended to undergraduate libraries supporting dance programs.”

Dr. Overby is Professor of Theatre and Dance and Faculty Director for Undergraduate Research and Experiential Learning at the University of Delaware and specializes in dance education and imagery research. Dr. Lepczyk is Professor of Dance in the Department of Theatre and Cinema atVirginia Tech and specializes in movement analysis and dance style research.

JPAS, On Line Journal

Submitted by Doris Green, October 13, 2011

JPAS (Journal of Pan African Studies) is an online publication that brings together scholars, educators and others who work within this area of concentration. JPAS began in 1987. Volume 4 number 6 is a special issue on African dance. My article is entitled “The Saga of African Dance and Black Studies Departments.”

The article traces African dance from the 'hub' of cities with large Black populations, namely New York City, to the continent of Africa where I studied in the bush, Art Centers and campuses of Universities of Africa. It reveals how I, always mesmerized by rhythm wrote my first drum sounds, when I was a teenager in high school, after a remark from a stenography teacher who said 'any sound could be written with the Pitman shorthand system'. I pondered the statement and questioned if any sound could be written, why not write drum sounds. With that I picked up my pencil and wrote  my first drum sounds.

The article explores how I aligned my system with Labanotation in an integrated score. It also points  out the dire need for a comprehensive textbook on African music and dance as any course in academia  that is not supported by a definitive textbook is not consider a viable course. As far as academia is concerned African music and dance is too young and disorganized to be viable courses. These courses  may be 42 years old in the U.S., and diaspora, but in Africa they are centuries old. Hopefully my textbook GREENOTATION: MANUSCRIPTS OF AFRICAN MUSIC AND DANCE will soon be published so African music and dance can take its rightful place in academia. 

I have had the pleasure of working with a number of the legends of Africa from the post-colonial cultural era. These people were the founding members of African music and dance as we know  and perform it today.It was not easy introducing my work to Africans because I am female and many felt that females should dance and not drum. But African dance is always accompanied by music. It is the music that controls the dance. If one does not understand the music, it makes it difficult to dance on time and interpret what the musicians indicate. When I did break through, they were astonished indicating that my work was what Africans had been seeking for decades. 

My autobiography No Longer an Oral Tradition: My Journey Through Percussion Notation was published in 2010. It tells the history of my voyage from Brooklyn to Africa, but my textbook defines and gives structure to the oral traditions of African music and dance, from Tanzania to Senegal  that is unparalleled.


My work essentially gives African music the scientific basis if formerly lacked and provides perpetuity to the field. 

Article about Ray Cook

Submitted by Charlotte Wile - October 4, 2011

Here is an interesting article about Ray Cook: 

"The Language of Dance, Examined", by Dana Gavin (Hudson Valley News, December 22-28, 2010, pp10-11.)

The article includes terrific photos of Laban and Labanotation.

Unfortunately, the link above is a little hard to navigate and view, at least on my computer. You need to go to the site, then click on the picture of the newspaper, then click on the thumbnail at the bottom for pages 10-11. To enlarge the view see the icons at the top of the page.

ICKL Proceedings - Theoretical Reports and Papers

Submitted by Charlotte Wile - September 6, 2011 

Facsimiles prepared by Rachael Leyva, Mei-Chen Lu, and Charlotte Wile

One of the most important institutions for promoting the development and standardization of Laban-based notation systems is the International Council of Kinetography Laban/Labanotation (ICKL).

Below are links to facsimiles of theoretical material in the proceedings for ICKL’s biennial conferences from 1959 to 2007. There is also a facsimile of an index for the 1963 to 1991 proceedings, which ICKL published in 1993.


The facsimiles of the theoretical material just contain each proceedings’ cover page, table of contents, technical reports, and technical papers. Application papers and other materials in the proceedings are not included here. The full proceedings are available at the Dance Notation Bureau library. In addition, some technical and non-technical papers in proceedings for recent conferences can be found on ICKL's website. 


When you go to each facsimile link below, you will see small navigation pages to the right. Because some parts of the proceedings were skipped when they were scanned, the page numbers on the navigation pages may not match page numbers on the facsimile. Also, some facsimile pages are crooked because the way the proceedings were bound made it difficult for them to be scanned.


1959-1977, First to Tenth Conferences 


The facsimiles of the 1959-1977 proceedings were taken from a compilation of conference papers and reports published together as one book in 1996. As has been done for other years, just the technical materials from the compilation are presented here. The year that the material was presented appears in the headings of the papers. Topics for each year are given below. 

• Topics for the First Conference (1959): Differences in Movement Analysis and Notation (The Trunk and its Parts, Writing Shifts, Trunk Rotations and Front, Jumps or No Jumps - Pause Sign, Step and Leg Gesture, Whole Body Rotation). 

• Topics for the Second Conference (1961): Unification (Centre of Gravity, Symbols for Chest and Trunk Movement, Inclusion Bow, Upper Part of Body Movement, Movements of the Whole Torso, Vertical Bow Cancellations, Automatic Space or Body Hold, Waist Sign Use of [Contraction and Extension Signs], Flexing and Stretching the Hand and Arm, Hands and Fingers, ["x"] with Direction Symbol, Use of the Body Constant and Space Constant References.

• Topics for the Third Conference (1963): Unification (Validity of a Symbol, Use of the 3rd Column for Upper Part of the Body Movements, Level of Supports in Crouching and After Kneeling, 'Holding' the Centre of Gravity, Weight Distribution in Open Positions, Szentpal's Rule for Hold Sign in Support Column, Meaning of a Step in Place After an Open Position, Space Between Supports for Echappe Movements, Sliding Steps, Shuffling Hops, Overlap of Support Symbols - As in a Sissonne Ferme, Step Turn Problems, Whole Torso Turns and Trunk Twists, Use of [Black Diamond and Whole Body Signs], Pelvic Rotations and Pelvic Tilts, Meaning of [Extension Signs] for the Arms, Meaning of [Extension Signs ] for the Hand, Meaning of [Extension Signs] for the Whole Torso, Position Pins for the Arms, Tick Marks, Shading of Turn Signs, Touch Signs in the Leg Gesture and Support Columns.

• Topics for the Fourth Conference (1965): Pelvic Movements; Centre of Gravity; Pause or Hold Sign; Dynamics; Position Signs Near Direction Signs (Szentpal); Guidances (Leeder); Guidances and 'Parasite' Symbols; Proposed Labanotation Changes (Venable); Space Measurement Signs, Floor Plans, Turn Signs; Knust's Handbook Changes; Review of Unification Discussions -1963 Conference. 

• Topics for the Fifth Conference (1967): Agreements and Unification (Cross of Axes, Spirals, Paths, Corrections & Additions & Clarification on Knust's Paper, Parts of Body, etc., Upper Body/Inclusions, Guidance/Leading and the Addition Bow, Succession/Sequential Movement, Centre of Gravity, Spot Retention Sign, Space Measurement Signs, Repeat Signs/Analogy Signs, Rotations, Caret/Staple, Sign for "Either," Notation Examples, Front Signs with Specific Meaning by Maria Szentpal) 

• Topics for the Sixth Conference (1969): Orthography and Analysis - Decisions and Recommendations (Rotations around Principal Axes by Valerie Preston-Dunlop, Work That is Not Concluded from the Research Committee by Valerie Preston-Dunlop, Motif Writing Developments by Valerie Preston-Dunlop, Meaning and Use of Pin Signs Within a Rotation Sign & Meaning and Use of Crosses of Axes Relating to Rotations by Albrecht Knust, The Standard Retention by Albrecht Knust, Questions of How We Read and Write Timing in Kinetography by Lucy Venable, Miscellaneous Problems by Maria Szentpal, Notation Examples, Suggestions About the Further Use of the Inner Subsidiary Column by Maria Szentpal, The Movement Family Tree by Ann Hutchinson, Indication of Difference Between Rotation and Twist by Ann Hutchinson, System of Reference for Head Tilts by Ann Hutchinson, Circular Paths on Vertical Planes by Albrecht Knust, Isolated Problems). 

• Topics for the Seventh Conference (1971): Agreements and Recommendations (Body Narrowness and Wideness & Space Narrowness and Wideness by Albrecht Knust with Comments by Maria Szentpal, The Application of the Inner Subsidiary Column by Maria Szentpal, Suggested Indication for Time by Ann Hutchinson with Comments by Maria Szentpal, The Meaning of the "X" in the Support Column Near a Leg Gesture by Maria Szentpal, Facing Pins - Suggested Augmentation by Ann Hutchinson, Shorthand for Labanotation by Ann Hutchinson, Matters Arising Out of Other Sessions, Notation Examples). 

• Topics for the Eighth Conference (1973): Agreements and Recommendations ("Normal" Distance in Standing by Maria Szentpal, Kneeling by Maria Szentpal,  Mixed Kneeling, Sitting by Maria Szentpal, Exclusion Bow, Symbol for Neither Stretched Nor Bent, Front Signs for Focal Point, Small Steps, Bent Leg Gestures, Supports Slightly Bent, Gestures and Supports, Slightly Bent, Leg Gestures Near the Floor, Small Steps, Leg Gestures Near the Floor, Slightly Bent Arm Gestures, Pins and Staples with Steps, Deviations, Placement of Accents, Description in Terms of Icosahedron, Area Around a Directional Point, Rounded Bow to Connect Columns, All fours by Albrecht Knust, Notation Examples).

• Topics for the Ninth Conference (1975): Technical Report (The Direction of the Progression and the Direction of the Path by Albrecht Knust, Track Pins by Ann Hutchinson and Maria Szentpal, Support on All Fours by Maria Szentpal, Split Body System (SpB), Direction from Body Part (DBP), Shape Writing by Ann Hutchinson, Use of Pins, Notation Examples). 

• Topics for the Tenth Conference (1977): Report on Technical Matters (Decisions About and Clarifications of Signs & Examples and Their Meanings - the 282 Item List, Deferred Items, Priority Items for 1979 Conference). 

1979, Eleventh Conference

• Topics: Technical Report (Pins for Positions of the Feet, Track Pins, Pins for Minor Movements, Place, Design Drawing, Validity). 

1981, Twelfth Conference

• Topics: Technical Report; Corrections and Additions for Unification Paper; Revised Validity Paper; Time Signs by Maria Szentpal; Clarification of the Different Possibilities of Accelerando and Ritardando When Applied to Movement; Musical Time Signs by Maria Szentpal; Writing Levels of Kneeling by Means of Angling or Approaching the Surface of Support in Different Directions by IleneFox and Jane Marriett; Direction from Body Part (DBP) by Maria Szentpal; Notation and the Dynamic Aspects of Dance by Sally Archbutt; Introduction to Dynamics Panel by Lucy Venable; Notes on Dynamic by Lisa Ullman; Dynamics Discussion by Sally Archbutt; Quality and Dynamics in the Laban Movement Analysis and Notation System by Janis Pforsich with Peggy Hackney;  Dynamic Discussion by Maria Szenpal; Statement on Dynamics for Panel Discussion by Muriel Topaz; Spatial Forms and Their Innate Dynamic Content by Lisa Ullman; Dynamics Exploration by Peggy Hackney with Janis Pforsich; Dynamics Summary by Lucy Venable; Report of the Principles Committee. 

1983, Thirteenth Conference

• Topics: Technical Report (Placement of Non-Movement Indications, Placement of Foot Hooks, Angling, Kneeling Levels, Options for Writing Kneeling, Preferred Usage for Writing Non-foot Supports, Reference for the Whole Arm, Black Diamond, Sectional Repeat Indications, Need for New Symbology for Head and Its Parts, Minor Movement, Time Signs, Revised and Expanded System of Symbols for On and Off Stage\Areas, Principles, Moving in and Out of Open Positions, Retention of a Leading or Guiding Part, Repeat and Analogy Signs, Validity); Angling by Ilene Fox and Jane Marriett; Revised Version—A Proposal for New Symbols for the Head and its Parts by Carl Wolz; August Revision—A Proposal for a Revised and Expanded System of Symbols for On and Off Stage\Areas by Carl Wolz; Moving Into and Out of Open Positions by Ann Hutchinson;  Modified Version of Analogy and Repeat Signs by Ann Hutchinson; Working Ideas Based on Column Hierarchy by Janet Moekle. 

1985, Fourteenth Conference

• Topics: The Principles and Basic Concepts of Laban's Movement; Report from the Research Panel (Measurement Signs, Normal Step Length, Direction from a Body Part, Peripheral Path for Third Degree Points, One Movement Bow, Polar Pins, Areas of the Hand and Foot, Modified Bow for Retained Part Leading/Guiding, Staff Extender, Indication of Intention, Validity of Part Leading/Guidance Bow, Ad lib, Staples and Carets, Line of Balance, Dynamics, Use of X and [Folding Sign] as Pre-Signs,The Sign [for Stillness], Paths for Gestures,Validity, Retention Signs, Time Signs, Unfinished Business); Errata, Supplements and Comments to Papers Disseminated Prior to the Conference; Edited Version of DBF Paper, 1981, by Maria Szentpal; Polar Pins for Minor Movements, revised 1985, by Ann Hutchinson, Jane Marriett, Ilene Fox; Areas of the Hand and Feet, revised 1985, by Sheila Marion; Index of Items Fully Accepted 1985; Index of Other Items. 

1987, Fifteenth Conference

• Topics: Technical Report (Sign to Replace the Staple for the Same Spot, Signs for Spreading and Closing, Surfaces of the Hand and Foot, Finger Fan, The Drawing of en Croix Repeats, Inner Subsidiary Column, Place Middle Pin, Symbols for Contraction Over a Diagonal Surface, Spot Hold for the Foot, Unfolding, Signs for Joints of the Legs, Validity of the Leading/Guiding Bow, Symbols for "A Surface," Clarification of Usage of [Release Signs] in the Support Column, Validity, Direction from a Body Part (DBP) for Gestures, New Symbol for Release Weight, The "Zed-Caret" and its Augmented Usage, Simultaneous Contraction and Rotation, Discussion of the Spine Sign, Errata and Supplements to Papers Disseminated Prior to the Conference); Validity- Yet Another Proposal by Ilene Fox; Vertical Bows - Validity by Ann Hutchinson Guest; Leading/Guiding - Validity by Ann Hutchinson Guest; D. B. P. for Gestures by Ann Hutchinson Guest; A Proposal for the Use of the Caret (< or >) Which Involves the Elimination of the Staple by Lucy Venable; Carets and Staples by Ann Hutchinson Guest; Index of Technical Papers Circulated Prior to the 1987 Conference; Index of Items Fully Accepted by ICKL, 1987, Index of Other Items. 

1989, Sixteenth Conference

• Topics: Report from the Research Panel (Modifiers, Symbols That Have Their Own Validity, Validity of Horizontal Bows, Zed Caret, Floorwork Staff, Signs for Sex of Performer, Group Formations, Meeting Line, Mini-Floor Plans, Relationship of Two People, Action Stroke, Pre-Staff Indications, Intermediate Directions, Standard Palm Facing, Anatomical Descriptions of the Spinal Column and Hip Joint Movement, Focal Point, Stylized Preparation for a Step, Natural, Floor Plans, Use of [a Vertical Line] with Measurement Signs in the Leg Gesture Column for "Duration" or "Air Line," Reconstructing KIN/LN Grammar by Rob van Haarst, Keys for Thought by Sheila Marion, Retention of Supports by Bill Reynolds, Validity by Ilene Fox); Errata for 1989 Papers; Addendum to Anatomical Descriptions by Karen Barracuda, KL/LN for Recording Idiokinetic Exercises-Clarification by Karen Barracuda.

1991, Seventeenth Conference

• Topics: Technical Sessions Address by Ann Hutchinson Guest; Report from the Research Panel (Time Signs,Validity, Floorwork, Kneeling, Minor Movements); Time Signs by Ann Hutchinson Guest. 

1993, Eighteenth Conference

• Topics: Report from the Research Panel (Summary of Voting, The Direction System of Labanotation/Kinetography Laban – A Clarification and Proposal by Janos Fugedi, Retention of Palm Facings in Labanotation by Ilene Fox, The Duration of an Indication Tied to a Path Sign -Validity of the Connecting Bow by Jacqueline Challet-Haas, Vertical Bows by Marion Bastien, Validity No. 3 Proposal by Ann Hutchinson Guest, A Validity Proposal for Gestural Actions by Sheila Marion and Judy Van Zile and Lucy Venable, Summary of Validity Discussions, Space Measurement Signs Versus Measurement Signs by Jacqueline Challet-Haas, Retention in the Support Column-Proposed New Rule); Errata to 1993 ICKL Papers; The Direction System of Labanotation/Kinetography Laban – A Clarification and Proposal by Janos Fugedi.

1993, Index for the 1963 to 1991 Proceedings

• Topics: Technical Papers Presented from 1963 to1991; Technical Decisions from 1979 to 1991; Non-technical Papers Presented from 1979-1991; Bow Chronology; New Signs. 

1995, Nineteenth Conference

• Topics: Technical Report (Proposal for Labanotation, The Standard Cross of Axes in Kinetography Laban and Introduction to Validity Papers - 1995 Validity Proposals, Interaction of Movement Categories, Report of Findings on Usages of [The Back to Normal Sign and the Decrease Sign] by Lucy Venable and Sheila Marion, What is Movement? And other Validity Issues by Ilene Fox, The Assessment of Distance in Supports in Kintography Laban/ Labanotation by Christine Eckerle, The Notation of Floorwork within the Laban System of Notation by Anja Hirvikalli). 

1997, Twentieth Conference

• Topics: Technical Report (Inverted Pelvis Sign, One Sided Spreading and Closing, Spreading and Closing from the Front and Back and Right and Left Sides and its Use with Direction Symbols, The 8/8 Scale for Contraction and Folding, The Centre of Gravity Level, Parts of the Torso, Weight Distribution, Folding, Props, An Analysis and Classification of Springs); Minor Topics, by Ann Hutchinson Guest; Folding - Analysis of Movement, by Ann Hutchinson Guest; Props, by Carl Wolz; An Analysis and Classification of Springs, by Janos Fugedi. 

1999, Twenty-First Conference

• Topics: Technical Report; Principal "KIN" Usages and Rules differing from "LAB" Usages and Rules, by Jacqueline Challet-Haas; A Fundamental Difference Between Kinetography Laban and Labanotation by Ilene Fox; Degrees of Folding the Torso by Ann Hutchinson Guest. 

2001, Twenty-Second Conference

(Note: This document contains page numbers on the papers that do not match the page numbers given in the table of contents.)

• Topics: Technical Report; To Caret of Not To Caret, That is the Question by Sandra Aberkalns and Ilene Fox; Readings in Kinetography Laban – KIN Usage Relating to Column Consistency, Floorwork, Pins, and Indications for the Hand and its Parts by Jacqueline Challet-Haas. Christine Eckerle, and Anja Hirvikallio; Indications for Freedom of Interpretation by Ray Cook; Space Measurement–New Signs by Ann Hutchinson Guest; Movement Signs Across Contexts by Sheila Marion. 

2004, Twenty-Third Conference

• Topics: Technical Report (A New Sign for the Body-as-a-Whole by Ann Hutchinson Guest, A Generic Indication for Revolving on a Straight Path by Ann Hutchinson Guest, An Indication for the Motion of Flexing and Extending by Ann Hutchinson Guest, Space Measurement Specified by Ann Hutchinson Guest, Use of the Body Columns by Ann Hutchinson Guest). 

2005, Twenty-Fourth Conference

• Topics: Report from the Research Panel (Step Gesture Analysis, Workshop on "Upper Body Movement Analysis" by Noelle Simonet,  Ad Lib and Freedom of Interpretation by Karin Hermes); Interpreting Timing Conventions in Labanotation by Ilene Fox and Rhonda Ryman; Upper Body Movement Analysis by Noelle Simonet; Ad Lib and Freedom of Interpretation by Karin Hermes; A Proposal for New Symbols for the Head and its Parts by Carl Wolz.

2007, Twenty-Fifth Conference

• Topics: Technical Report (A Simplified Use of Consecutive Foot Hooks by Janos Fugedi, Unit Timing of Touching Gestures by Janos Fugedi); A Simplified Use of Consecutive Foot Hooks by Janos Fugedi; Traveling Arial Turns Arriving on Both Legs by Janos Fugedi; Notation of Leg Circles by Janos Fugedi; Unit Timing of Touching Gestures by Janos Fugedi.

Resources and Riches: Dance Notation Bureau

Submitted by Mei-Chen Lu - August 31, 2011

This is a post print of an article whose final and definitive form has been published in the Dance Chronicle: Studies in Dance and the Related Arts © 2009 Taylor & Francis; Dance Chronicle is available online at: www.tandfonline.com

Note:

Because this article was published in 2009, there are a number of changes took effect afterward–

The theory meeting minutes are available to view at http://dnbtheorybb.blogspot.com/search/label/Minutes%20for%20Theory%20Meeting%20Thread

Now the Notated Theatrical Dances Catalog is available online at http://dancenotation.org/catalog/

For staging inquires, please contact Alice Helpern at alicehelpern@dancenotation.org

RESOURCES AND RICHES:

DANCE NOTATION BUREAU
by Mei-Chen Lu

The Dance Notation Bureau (DNB), founded in 1940, occupies a series of rooms with staff working on different projects and activities in a high-rise office building near the Wall Street financial district in New York City.  With a name ending in “Bureau,” people always imagine that there are hundreds of workers.  The size of the DNB is actually small: there are nine staff members with several volunteers and interns handling the staging contracts, dance notation projects, educational programs, library loans, and grant applications.  The DNB is the only organization in the United States dedicated to the promotion, preservation, documentation, and study of human movement and dance through a symbol system called Labanotation, named after its inventor, Hungarian dancer and theorist, Rudolf Laban (1879-1958). 

Labanotation scores function for dance in the same way as music scores do for music.  Typically, the Labanotation score of a dance composition is created by the time the work is staged on a company that is not familiar with the dance.  It contains the analysis of movements, floor patterns, and information about motivations and nuances that are transmitted as the work is being refined by the choreographer or stager.  The score is laid out in measures on a staff corresponding to the music measures.  These detailed scores give permanency to a work by allowing the dance to be performed or studied long after the lifetime of the artist who created that work. 

Dance Notation Bureau History

During the 1920s and 1930s, Laban's system for notating movement was introduced in the United States by Irma Otte-Betz and Irmgard Bartenieff.  At that time, the recording of dance held little interest for most choreographers, teachers, or dancers, but the teaching, lecturing and writing of these two enthusiastic individuals created the opportunity for the system to become known and used.  Their co-authored book, Elementary Studies in Laban's Dance Script, which they themselves published in 1937, was the first that contained reading materials in Laban's notation.  Four other women—Ann Hutchinson (afterward, Ann Hutchinson Guest), Helen Priest, Eve Gentry (then known as Henrietta Greenhood) and Janey Price—all of whom had studied Labanotation with different masters in Europe and the United States, soon joined those advocating dance notation.  On May 15, 1940 these four met to exchange their knowledge of notation and discuss differences in usage, which had not yet been addressed in the United States.  This meeting was also attended by two other influential people:  Hanya Holm, choreographer and pupil of Laban's famous student, Mary Wigman, and John Martin, dance critic of the New York Times and notation advocate.  Martin encouraged them to form a center, suggesting the name Dance Notation Bureau, with the purpose of standardizing Laban's system, and Holm offered her dance school as the DNB’s first official mailing address.  Both of them served as advisors for the DNB. 

The DNB started without members and formalities.  Each founder contributed ten dollars to begin the new organization.  All volunteered to work toward the goal of standardizing Laban's notation system.  To guide the Bureau's activities, seven aims were identified:

1. to act as a clearing house, research, and work center,
2. to standardize the Laban notation (as it was then called),
3. to teach dance notation,
4. to issue diplomas to those qualified to teach and to notate,
5. to record dances and ballets,
6. to form a library of dance works, and
7. to perpetuate dance through the use of notation.

Two years later, Eugene Loring commissioned the DNB to notate his ballet, Billy the Kid, in order to establish his ownership of the choreography.  Hutchinson, with the assistance of Priest and Anne Wilson, who was a member of Loring's company and later became a board member of the DNB, notated the work.  This was the first ballet to be recorded in the United States using Laban's notation system.  

Through the dedication of the Bureau’s founders, the dance world slowly started accepting dance notation.  In 1948, George Balanchine, who had a strong interest in notating his own choreography, contacted Hutchinson to study notation.  This request resulted in the DNB notating his ballets as they were set on the Ballet Society, predecessor to the New York City Ballet.  At that time, the dance scores were only regarded as records and the works were still staged from memory, as a teacher or dancer worked with another dancer.  It was not until much later that notation proved its real value for choreographers or stagers to mount a dance directly from a notation score.  In 1958, the High School for the Performing and Visual Arts in New York City staged Balanchine's Symphony in C from the Labanotation score.  This was the first of many stagings from scores in both ballet and modern dance.

Renowned modern dance choreographer Doris Humphrey was also convinced of the value of notation.  She had created her own system for recording dance but was not able to fully develop it.  When introduced to Labanotation, she became a supporter.  Her dance, the Shakers, was notated in 1948 by Hutchinson and Els Grelinger in Humphrey’s repertory class in New York City.  In the following years, many of her works, including Variations and Conclusion from New Dance, Partita V, Desert Gods from Song of the West, Soaring, Water Study, With My Red Fires, and Passacaglia and Fugue in C minor, were also notated in her repertory classes at Dance Players Studio, the Juilliard School, and the Connecticut College Summer School of Dance.  Ritmo Jondo, Day on Earth, and Night Spell, which Humphrey created for the José Limón Company, were documented in Labanotation when she served as choreographer and artistic director of Limón’s company.  Today, the total number of performances of Humphrey’s choreography staged from Labanotation scores has exceeded sixteen hundred.

In 1950, Hanya Holm’s Kiss Me Kate in Labanotation form achieved a milestone when it secured copyright for the choreographer under the dramatic-musical composition category (choreographic classification did not exist at this time).  By means of a Labanotated score, choreographers had finally gained the right of protection of their creations because such scores, like videotapes and DVDs, represent an ephemeral art form in the tangible format required by the United States Copyright Office.

After its efforts at standardizing the notation system and its success in creating notated dance scores, the DNB was able, in 1952, to fulfill another of its seven goals—that of forming a library.  In 1968, Lucy Venable, then the DNB president, accepted a teaching position at the Ohio State University (OSU).  Venable, with dance department chair Helen P. Alkire, formed the DNB Extension for Education and Research within the OSU Department of Dance.  Due to then unstable finances at the DNB, which relied on support from intermittent government grants and private foundations to maintain notation projects and other activities, Venable brought to OSU the original DNB scores where, it was thought, the materials would be more safely housed.  OSU made two photocopies of the original scores: one copy remains at the DNB and the other is in the New York Public Library.  Since 1969, newly acquired original manuscripts have been stored in the DNB Library in New York City, now occupying a space that is approximately 400 square feet.

In the 1970s, the DNB created the Dance Notation Bureau Press to publish notation scores and books.  Doris Humphrey: The Collected Works (notated by Hutchinson, Grelinger, Odette Blum, Muriel Topaz, and Jane Marriet) was the first of a series of notated dances that was made available for purchase by the artist’s consent.  Over the course of thirty years, a number of textbooks for Labanotation and Movement Analysis were issued: Elementary Labanotation: A Study Guide (Topaz), Study Guide for Intermediate Labanotation (Marriet and Topaz), Elementary and Intermediate Reading Studies (Elementary: Topaz; Intermediate: Peggy Hackney, Sarah Manno, and Topaz), Readings in Modern Dance (vol. 1: Jane Edelson, et al.; vol. 2: Michele Varon), Space Harmony (Cecily Dell, Aileen Crow, and Bartenieff), Methods of Perceiving Patterns of Small Group Behavior (Martha Davis), Primer for Movement Description Using Effort-Shape (Dell), and many others.  These books are available for purchase through the Dance Horizons website, www.dancehorizons.com. 

In the 1970s and 1980s, the concept of a notation score was expanded from a simple score of recorded choreography to a complete package including dance production information.  Ann Hutchinson Guest recalled that Herbert Kummel, the first executive director of the DNB, commented that the dance score was incomplete.  He pointed out that music, costume, lighting, sets, props, movement style, casting, and other information, which assisted a stager to realize the dance on stage, needed to be carefully documented as well.  The majority of scores now include the production information in the score's introduction.  Materials that do not fit in the score's introduction are assembled separately as a supplementary package, accompanying the Labanotation score when it is staged.

From 1970 to 1989, a total of 400 scores were submitted to the DNB Library.  The works of Gerald Arpino, Balanchine, Laura Dean, Bill T. Jones, Kurt Jooss, Bob Fosse, Hanya Holm, José Limón, Donald McKayle, Agnes de Mille, Alwin Nikolais, David Parsons, Moses Pendleton, Anna Solokow, Antony Tudor, and others were notated through the generous support of the National Endowment for the Arts in partnership with private foundations.

The DNB continues to act as the center of theory development in Labanotation.  Since the 1980s, the DNB has regularly hosted theory meetings for notation professionals to discuss developments in the use of the symbols.  The minutes for these meetings are posted on the DNB's website: http://www.dancenotation.org/thoerybb/index.html.  In 1999, the Dance Heritage Coalition included the DNB in its America’s Irreplaceable Dance Treasures: the First 100.  The DNB has also begun to focus on new choreographers, adding the works of Robert Battle, Peter Quanz, and others to its collections.

DNB Library

The DNB Library was established in 1952.  Lucy Venable, then a part-time DNB staff member and a professional dancer with the José Limón Dance Company, volunteered to organize, manage, and catalogue two file drawers of Labanotation scores and other notations with advice from Genevieve Oswald, then curator of the Dance Division at the New York Public Library for the Performing Arts.  The DNB Library now maintains the world’s most substantial collection of dance and movement notation, including folk and nonwestern dance scores, information on current and historical notation systems, technique studies, educational materials, examples of notating sports, and studies of animal movement patterns.  The backbone of the library is its unique collection of over 760 Labanotation scores of notated theatrical dances.  They represent more than 210 choreographers, among them Alvin Ailey, Balanchine, Battle, Agnes De Mille, William Forsythe, Martha Graham, Humphrey, Lin Hwai-min, Mark Morris, Jerome Robbins, Ruth St. Denis, Ted Shawn, Anna Sokolow, and Tudor.  In addition to the Labanotation scores, the DNB Library collects supplementary information, including marked music scores, costume patterns, fabric swatches, light plots and cue sheets, prop and set information, newspaper clippings, programs, photographs, correspondence, rehearsal or performance videos, and music cassettes and CDs.  Each year, the library adds to its comprehensive collection five to ten new scores produced by staff or contracted notators and acquired through donations.  Through this rich collection, the Bureau assists twenty to thirty stagings from Labanotation score yearly, and lends approximately 200 dance scores and their supplementary materials for educational and research purposes.

The Library is divided into three categories:  the Marjorie Isaac Archive, the Research Collection and the Maria Grandy Circulating Collection.  The Marjorie Isaac Archive, occupying sixty-five cubic feet, is a manuscript repository of over 760 original Labanotation scores, along with subsequent notation and choreographic revisions and editions.  Original manuscripts, together with handwritten pencil scores and computer-generated LabanWriter scores, are inventoried and stored in acid-free folders and boxes.

The DNB Library has an ongoing cooperative effort with the NYPL and Jerome Lawrence and Robert E. Lee Theatre Research Institute at OSU to microfilm original Labanotation scores.  The microfilm negative is stored in the NYPL vault.  The NYPL and OSU each keep one positive copy of the microfilm.

The Research Collection, along with the Marjorie Isaac Archive, is the heart of the DNB Library.  Materials in the Research Collection are available, sometimes requiring permission from artists or their representatives, to researchers, stagers and students.  The Research Collection has several components, the largest being the Master File (ninety cubic feet).  This contains a copy of the original Labanotation score photocopied onto acid-free paper, which is the master preservation copy.  It also contains materials that supplement the notated score: a marked music score, costume sketches and/or fabric swatches, light plots, set information, programs, newspaper clippings, photographs and correspondence, which would not fit in the introduction of the score.  Only the production information is assembled as a package and lent to stagers.  The rest of the materials may be accessed, with supervision, at the DNB library.  The primary source of the Labanotation score together with the above-mentioned supplementary materials provides vital information about a particular dance to stagers, researchers, and students that can be found only at the DNB Library.

The Research Collection also includes audiovisual materials that supplement the Labanotation score.  Examples are reel to reel tapes (ten cubic feet), LP vinyl records (two cubic feet), audio cassettes (twelve cubic feet), music CDs (seven cubic feet), videotapes (forty cubic feet), and DVDs (five cubic feet). 

In addition, there are other components in this collection, including the Richard Holden Collection of dances in Benesh Movement Notation (four cubic feet), the Publications Archive of the DNB journals, newsletters and bulletins (nine cubic feet), the photography collection (two cubic feet), as well as the Research Files on different notation usages and other notation systems (four cubic feet).

The Maria Grandy Circulating Collection is named after a former DNB board chair who was also the first ballet mistress* to learn Labanotation.  She staged many works from scores and trained dancers with the aid of notation.  The main component of the circulating collection is notated theatrical dances, which consist of photocopies of the Labanotation score (1000 items) and materials related to the score, such as music scores (500 items), music CDs (150 items), videotapes (250 items), DVDs (175 items), and other supplementary materials (50 items) designed to enhance the user's understanding of the dance.  The circulating scores may have certain restrictions set by the choreographers or their estate.  According to their wishes, the score may be made available for study, research, or staging.  The DNB often serves as a liaison between the choreographer (or estate) and those who wish to use the score.

Currently, the catalog of notated theatrical dances is available for download on the DNB's website http://www.dancenotation.org/DNB/library/ntd.html.  The DNB has been working to make the catalog of the dance scores searchable online for stagers, researchers, students, teachers and DNB members.

The library also circulates dance notation books, including Labanotation texts in foreign languages, books on other notation systems, and assorted dances published in various notation systems.  In addition, it has a sizable collection of curriculum materials, such as theory examples, repertory excerpts, sample course outlines, and visual aids.  The Technique Research File includes information on advanced theory topics as well as recent developments in the Labanotation system adopted by the International Council of Kinetography Laban, an organization formed in 1959 to assure the consistency and continued development of the Labanotation system.  The World Dance Collection has dances from Africa, Europe, Asia, North America, and South America.  Scores range from one to one hundred pages in length. 

The DNB Library is staffed by a full-time librarian and is open Monday to Friday from 10 am to 6 pm by appointment. Evening and weekend appointments may be arranged under special circumstances.  The library is open year round with the exception of major holidays.  Research questions about notation, specific choreographers, or dances can be submitted to Mei-Chen Lu, Director of Library Services, by telephone (212-571-7011) or email (library@dancenotation.org). Staging inquiries can be sent to Kristin Jackson, Director of Programs, at kristinjackson@dancenotation.org.

---

* Grandy danced primarily with the Robert Joffrey Theater Ballet, and she staged works from Labanotation scores for companies throughout the world.  See her obituary by Jack Anderson, “Maria Grandy, 61, Ballet Coach And Head of Notation Bureau.“  New York Times, April 1, 1998.