Monday, January 25, 2010

Effort Discussions 5 [Terminology]

Effort Discussions 5 [Terminology]
By Ann Hutchinson Guest, submitted June 6, 2000
Originally posted on LabanTalk, April 3, 2000

Dear Colleagues,

I would like to take this opportunity to thank all of you who responded to my questions concerning terminology used for the various aspects of Effort, please forgive me for not writing to you individually.

Several of you mentioned Kestenberg's Movement Profile and that her book would be a valuable source for me. I am sure this is true, but it is not the material itself on which I am seeking clarification, I am challenging the words used, the terms, and how appropriate (or not) they are.

One interesting response I received brought up the history of the divide between Labanotation and Effort/Shape, indicating that comparative newcomers to this work are not aware of the historical development. Having been part of that development (in 1947 Laban personally explained his new Effort development and was interested to know how I reacted to the English words used [press, punch, etc.] in comparison with the words previously used for the Eukinetic qualities), it might be good to have on hand the historical development to put newcomers in the picture.

Looking forward to seeing you and to lively talk!

All the best,


I have decided now to come to Motus Humanus and will arrive Salt Lake City May 10th and leave June 15th. I did not know about any subsequent roundtable, but can't stay on anyway as too many plans are already set. I hope, however, that there will be time in-between to talk with many of you and to see where such discussions might lead. I hope you will see this as important as I do. Why keep calling a tulip a rose when a tulip already has its own name? Just as ICKL has done so much for Labanotation over the years in bringing about unification, so, many of us feel, a comparable 'ICKL' is needed for Effort/Shape (or whatever that body of knowledge is being called these days)

No comments:

Post a Comment