Hostname: page-component-745bb68f8f-grxwn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-01-15T15:18:48.007Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Pedagogic Significance of Modern Dance Training on the Twenty-First-Century Dancing Body, with Reference to Doris Humphrey's Dance Technique and Movement Philosophy

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  04 January 2013

Lesley Main
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

A primary issue for dance education and training is ensuring that the “trained body” is equipped for the range of activity today's dance practitioner will encounter. Modern dance techniques offer a breadth of knowledge on numerous and inter-related levels, encompassing the physical, physiological, artistic, historical, musical, and analytical. This paper will consider the relevance and benefits that “traditional” modern dance training can have on today's dancer. Issues addressed will include what our students are using technique for; what a codified dance technique can offer; and the progression to a “trained body” and how this can be achieved.

Type
Research Article
Information
Congress on Research in Dance Conference Proceedings , Volume 41 , supplement S1: Global Perspectives On Dance Pedagogy: Research And Practice , 2009 , pp. 47 - 53
Copyright
Copyright © The Author(s) 2009

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Works Cited

Bales, Melanie, and Nettl-Fiol, Rebecca. 2008. The Body Eclectic: Evolving Practice in Dance Training. Urbana: University of Illinois Press.Google Scholar
Buckroyd, Julia. 2002. The Student Dancer. London: Dance Books.Google Scholar
Green, Jill. 2009. Review of The Body Eclectic: Evolving Practice in Dance Training. Research in Dance Education 10 (1): 91–94.Google Scholar
Humphrey, Doris. 1959. The Art of Making Dances. New York: Grove Press.Google Scholar
Morris, Gay. 2006. A Game for Dancers. Middletown, CT. Wesleyan University Press.Google Scholar
Stevens, Jayne. 2006. “Rethinking Dance Technique in Higher Education.” Report for PALATINE, the Higher Education Academy Subject Centre for Dance Drama, and Music, UK. Retrieved July 28, 2009, from <http://www.palatine.ac.uk/events/viewreport/309/>..>Google Scholar
Stinson, Susan W. 2005. “Reflections on Educating Dance Educators.” In Teaching Dance Studies, edited by Chazin-Bennahum, Judith, 217–34. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar

Additional Works Consulted

Barr, Sherrie. 2009. “Examining the Technique Class: Re-examining Feedback.” Research in Dance Education 10 (1): 17–34.Google Scholar
Bramley, Ian. 2002. Dance Teaching Essentials. London: Dance UK.Google Scholar
Brinson, Peter. 1992. Dance as Education: Toward a National Dance Culture. London: Falmer.Google Scholar
Franklin, Eric. 2004. Conditioning for Dance. Champaign, IL. Human Kinetics.Google Scholar
McFee, Graham. 2004. The Concept of Dance Education. London: Pageantry.Google Scholar
Smith-Autard, Jackie. 2002. The Art of Dance Education. London: A and C Black.Google Scholar
Stodelle, Ernestine. 1995. The Dance Technique of Doris Humphrey and Its Creative Potential. London: Dance Books.Google Scholar