Sunday, July 1, 2012

Minutes for the Open Theory Meeting – April 27, 2012

Submitted by Charlotte Wile - July 1, 2012

The videos and written summaries below document the Open Theory Meeting held on April 27, 2012 at the Dance Notation Bureau in New York City.

Present: Sandra Aberkalns, Zack Brown, Tina Curran, Frederic Curry, Susan Gingrasso (via Skype), Ann Hutchinson Guest, Mira Kim, Mei-Chen Lu, Lynn Parkerson, Lynne Weber, and Charlotte Wile. (The attendees identify themselves on Video 1 at minute 1:38. Oona joined the meeting at 7:48 in Video 2.)

Topic: Central, Peripheral, and Transverse


Summary of issues discussed:

1.1   Central, Peripheral, and Transverse have various meanings and usage in the Laban community.

1.2     Ann’s perception of the concepts:
  • The way “Central” and “Peripheral” were taught in the Jooss-Leeder school (as part of Eukinetics).
  • Physically Peripheral, Physically Central, Spatially Peripheral, Spatially Central [Ann discusses these variables in Your Move].
1.3   The development of Effort.


Summary of issues discussed:

2.1   William Forsythe's exploration of Central and Peripheral movement.

2.2   The LMA perception of Central and Peripheral in relation to reach space in the kinesephere.

2.3   The LMA perception of Central and Peripheral seems to be different from Ann’s perception.

2.4   Inclusion of a body portion vs. involving that portion in a movement.

2.5   The theoretical intellectual idea of a movement vs. the physical expression of a movement.


Summary of issues discussed:

3.1   A general vs. more specific perception of the concepts.

3.2   Differences between the LMA and Ann’s perception of the concept.

3.3   Can the concepts be used in Labanotation as well as Motif Notation?

3.4    What determines how a movement should be notated. For example, can it be the dancers execution of the movement as well as what the choreographer says about the movement?

3.5   Application of Central and Peripheral to body parts as well as the whole body.

3.6   Initiation – e.g., a movement can be peripheral but initiated centrally.

3.7   The LMA perception of the various ideas being discussed, e.g., Central, Peripheral, and Transverse pathways.

3.8    Core, mid-limb, distal, and proximal initiation; and Central, Peripheral, and Transverse Spatial Tension.

3.9    Central, Transverse, and Peripheral Pathways in Space Harmony.

3.10   The term “direct path.” What does it mean in Space Harmony vs. Labanotation?


Summary of issues discussed:

4.1   The terms “direct path,” “straight path,” and “peripheral path” in Labanotation and Motif Notation.

4.2   The LMA definition of Central, Peripheral, and Transverse (Pathways and Tensions) in Moving About, by Charlotte Wile with Ray Cook ("Notes," page 371).

4.3   The meaning of “direct path,” "straight path," “peripheral path,” and “transversal path” in Labanotation, 4th edition.

4.4   Differences between how the terms are use in Labanotation (4th edition) vs. how they are used in DNB correspondence courses.

4.5   Origin of the term “transverse” – e.g., in Laban, The Language of Movement.

4.6   A “transversal”  in Space Harmony (from the corner of one plane to the corner of another plane) vs. moving “transversly.”


Summary of issues discussed:

5.1   Applying the concepts under consideration to body parts as well as the whole body.

5.2   The default paths (curved or straight) in Labanotation when moving from one direction to another direction. In Motif Notation, unless stated otherwise, the path is open to interpretation.

5.3   Further discussion of “direct paths” vs. “straight paths” in Labanotation.

5.4   Qualities, intentions, and tempos that may be associated with movement on various paths.

5.5   In Motif Notation the path between two directions is open to interpretation. How can one specify that the path is straight or curved?

5.6.    Description of a trace form using direction signs vs. path signs.


Summary of issues discussed:

6.1   The need to clarify the use of the terms “direct path,” “straight path,” and “transverse path.”

6.2    The categorization of the terms under consideration.

6.3    Various meanings and terms have emerged as the concepts have been used in various contexts and applications.

6.4   The meaning of  “counter-tension.”

6.5   The meaning of one, two and three dimensional spatial tensions in Space Harmony.

6.6   Somatic connectivity patterns support spatial tension.


Summary of issues discussed:

7.1    The concepts of “Central Spatial Tension,” “Peripheral Spatial Tension,” and “Transverse Spatial Tension.”

7.2.    Various Shape Modes are affined or support the different “Spatial Tensions.”

7.3    Using Spatial Tension as support for Irmgard Bartenieff's “Flying Diagonals.”

7.4    Ann’s training in falling on the diagonal is what got her a job with Agnes De Mille.

7.5    Applying the concept of Spatial Tension creatively to the movement between people.

7.6    Using Space Harmony and “tension” concepts to become more functionally and expressively better movers.


Summary of issues discussed:

8.1   Should a new term for “direct path” be found to avoid confusion? Should the everyday meaning of “straight” and “direct” be taken into account in creating a new term?

8.2   More discussion on the difference between straight, direct, and central paths.

8.3   Should there be more flexibility in what terms are used?

No comments:

Post a Comment