Panels der Tagung Tanz ' [und] ' Theorie:
kuratiert von Sibylle Peters und Kerstin Evert
Bojana Cvejic / Marijke Hoogenboom / Victoria Pérez Royo / Jan Ritsema
How will practices of artistic research connect everyday expertise and scientific knowledge?
May artistic research claim a particular social responsibility in the context of a democratic information society?
The conception of artistic work as »research« has a long tradition which can be traced from the Romantics through the »experimental stage« (Merz) of the avant garde all the way down to the present.
At the same time the phraseology of describing art as research has repeatedly embraced the claim that
this was a new, only recently established practice. With regard to dance and choreography in particular
this occasionally conceals more than it reveals. Thus in contrast to an emphasis on the New, this Panel will deal rather with the concrete approaches that are currently defining the field of artistic research at the
interfaces of dance/ choreography/performance.
The Panel will focus on three aspects: First, we shall discuss ' taking ourselves as examples ' the hybrid ways of working between art and science.
Secondly, the relationship between research and presentation and the related confrontation of product and process orientation is to be explored in more detail. Thirdly, we mean to describe the challenges associated with
the culture of transdisciplinary research that might develop out of the transition to a »knowledge society«.
Bildlichkeit / Visualität / Medialität
kuratiert von Bettina Brandl-Risi
Maaike Bleeker / Michael Diers / Hermann Kappelhoff / Chris Kondek / Timo Skrandies
What happens when movement becomes an image? What happens when images are set in motion? How
does this reworking of their intersections affect our perception of images and movement?
The relation of image and movement promises to provoke disciplinary research and to open up spaces
for re negotiations of iconicity, visuality, mediality in and through movement. The hope for this Panel
would be that asking about the image, about visuality and mediality could serve to challenge common notions of performance, movement and dance, e.g. by challenging the way the temporality of performances could be too easily understood only as a present unfolding in a linear way, as a continuous
movement. And at the same time the reverse: How does thinking about movement and performance alter your conception of the image, as something other than stable? In bringing together scholars from Theatre and Dance Studies, from Art History and Film Studies as well as practitioners, this Panel will be able to experiment with the relation of image and movement beyond disciplinary boundaries and generate productive uncertainties about tensions, oscillations and collapses of one into the other.
kuratiert von Gerald Siegmund
Stefan Hölscher / Sabine Huschka / Krassimira Kruschkova / Juliane Rebentisch / Katja Schneider
The rejection of traditional and normative dance techniques, the search for a different relationship with the
audience, and the trying out of other ways of production as witnessed in the past two decades were meant to transfer dance into an open situation for which the traditional notions of the autonomous work of art and of the Beautiful would no longer be adequate.
This placed the question of the aesthetic squarely between the poles of an autonomous concept of art as
represented by the aesthetics of the sublime of someone like Jean Francois Lyotard, and of the notion of art as situation, as formulated by Nicolas Bourriaud in his Relational Aesthetics.
Jacques Rancière has dealt with this dichotomy in the context of his theses on the relationship between aesthetics and politics:
the autonomous work of art is political in its radical turning of its back on the world and in its opening to the unrepresentable that can only be experienced in a non conceptual way. In his book on Postdramatic Theatre Hans Thies Lehmann brings dance as a rejection of logos within hailing distance of such an aesthetic. On the other hand the situation is political, as by introducing art into life it creates social relations that are felt to be deficient in peopleÊ¼s everyday lives. A third way, that proved to be very promising both for many scholars of dance and artists, is Gilles DeleuzeÊ¼s notion of art as a bundle of
affects generated by the shaping of materials. Deleuze thus takes up a position between an autonomous
aesthetics and the open situation. In an implicit recourse to the Russian Formalists and their dictum of
»art as process« he seeks on the one hand to postulate the work of art as a settled reality in its own right.
On the other hand, by means of its own form and formation, which arises through structuring, through its
construction and dismantling, it generates and preserves affects which open up the work to the recipient.
kuratiert von Beatrice von Bismarck
Franz Anton Cramer / Florian Malzacher / Ruth Noack / Marion von Osten / Frank'Manuel Peter
With processuality, flexibility, and openness this Panel means to apply such criteria in its approach to the subject of archives as contribute to their conscious and active participation in the present and future of society.
If one assumes that archives have their own power structures, there are two claims that give rise to the hierarchies that manifest themselves in them: one is the hope that one can survive the present by recording it, and the other is the striving for the greatest possible completeness. What is excluded, however, is not only the constitutive power of archiving, which produces its object in the act of recording, but also polyphony and dynamic as a mark of the processes of the constitution of meaning. The curatorial may be understood as the agency which mediates between the archival on the one hand and dance on
the other. In the first place it sets the archival element in motion by showing its perpetually temporary,
processual praxis, thus lending both collections and exhibitions through the act of compilation a performative character not dissimilar to that of the dance.
Secondly, as far as the relationship between dance and archive is concerned, the activity of »curating« or establishing connections can be understood independently of occupational titles. With the aim of creating a public for cultural materials, information and procedures and making it receptive to them, the performance room, with its interdisciplinary character, will be the central medium. Thus conceived, dance is at once the subject and the object of archives.
kuratiert von André Lepecki
Franco Barrionuevo Anzaldi / Bojana Kunst / Boyan Manchev / Avanthi Meduri / Martin Nachbar
If political theory is also a theory of social action, and if choreography theorizes and explores how to
invent actions, could dancing be that theoretical practice and that practical theory that would allow for political theory to understand itself more pragmatically?
What can dance, understood as a practice of corporeal inventiveness and social mobilizations, offer to contemporary critical theories of political action? What can dance offer to the notion of »political movement«?
How is it possible that in the current continental discourse on dance, the political fact of colonialism, of
colonization and post colonization, of racism and its interpellations, of racism and its capacities to produce bodies and movement effects are constantly »forgotten« from critical discourse and from choreographic practices? Is it possible that the political unconscious of European dance and European Dance Studies be the repressed strata of its recent and its current colonizing histories and colonizing modes of subjectivation?
The recent proliferation of »the political« in all sorts of discourses on and about current artistic practices
may be reaching a level of consensual saturation. This could be a good sign:
one of increased political awareness among art practitioners and theorists and of increased awareness of the necessity for art to engage itself against the total colonization of subjectivities and bodies we now live in ' under the name of globalization. However, this proliferation of the word »political« in its relation to »art« also brings the risk of a fad of »the political«. What are the words, concepts, choreographic imaginations, steps, modes of embodying, modes of inventing bodies, modes of assembling dances, that could maintain the political power of dance active, generative, generous, inventive, accute ' against facile and fashionable
instrumental uses of »the political« as an empty refrain in artistic discourses and critical discourses about
kuratiert von Susanne Foellmer
Laurent Goldring / Yvonne Hardt / Sandra Noeth / Isabelle Schad / Peter Stamer / Isa Wortelkamp
Who or what defines the next generation, and who does the term refer to?
Should the participants in this
Panel see themselves as such?
Must there be a distinction between art and (scientific) institution?
Andhow can we get round the paradox that what is supposed to be the next generation is already talking
about itself today?
Such considerations give birth to multiple time planes which will be discussed in this Panel when we talk
about a potential future generation from the perspective of today, which in turn can only rest on foundations which were laid in the past, in (aesthetic, political, ethical,...) views, in discourses. In the last analysis the promise of the next generation always has a tinge of retrospect and deferral.
To pose or even postulate the question of a »next generation« is very much a critical undertaking, especially in times of a non linear approach to history. The concept seems to imply a posture basically directed towards the future and a promise of new potential. What is remarkable about this is that the utopian vision, the promise that the future is expected to redeem, is usually rooted in some kind of present. If, for example, »new« strategies of artistic collaboration (which in the meantime are viewed quite critically) or the primacy of openness ' whether in thinking patterns, aesthetics or artistic practices ' are marks of contemporaneity, what is the big new development that the New Generation will have to face?
What will be expected of it?
Will the next generation be found at some nebulous location far removed
from Modernism and Postmodernism?
How would it define, for example, the structures of body and movement involved in dance?
Does the postulate of the »unfinished« require positionings and restrictions
in order to render the Open visible or to make democratic cooperation possible at all?
If so, the potential also harbours within it the risk of failure.
A conspicuous finding is that both artistic and scientific works are increasingly taking place in announcement mode. The status of the »project« is omnipresent, almost becoming an end in itself, constantly concerned to justify its existence in the promise of what is to happen in future. Such practices are largely determined by application requirements. This gives rise to the paradoxical situation of a Future II as an announcement of what may never happen. And is a coming generation not always subject to the imperative of »make it new«? Just as one of the basic assumptions (and justifications) of art and science is the need to constantly reinvent itself?
(Quelle: Tanz ' [und] ' Theorie Booklet)