Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-gbm5v Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-23T00:29:41.493Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Ownership, ontology, and the contemporary dance commons

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 December 2022

Hetty Blades Open the ORCID record for Hetty Blades [Opens in a new window]
Hetty Blades*
Affiliation:
Centre for Dance Research (C-DaRE), Coventry University, United Kingdom
*
Email: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

This article considers the “commons” in relationship to contemporary dance in the United Kingdom. I highlight the norms and expectations that shape the sharing of dance in this context by outlining four implicit rules that govern circulation and ownership. I go on to highlight how dance’s circulation outside of legal structures is in part due to its ontology through the examination of choreographer and visual artist Florence Peake’s work RITE (2018) and its relationship to choreographer Vaslav Nijinsky’s Le Sacre du printemps (The Rite of Spring) (1913).

Type
Article
Information
International Journal of Cultural Property , Volume 29 , Special Issue 2: Special Issue: Contemporary Dance, Knowledge, and Models for Ownership , May 2022 , pp. 123 - 140
Check for updates
Copyright
© The Author(s), 2022. Published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of the International Cultural Property Society

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

Adewole, ‘F. 2019. “The Concept of ‘Community’ and ‘Professional’ Dance.” Animated. https://www.communitydance.org.uk/DB/animated-library/the-concept-of-community-and-professional-dance (accessed 31 August 2021).Google Scholar
Archer, K., and Hodson, M..1999. “Confronting Oblivion: Keynote Address and Lecture Demonstration on Reconstructing Ballets.” In Preservation Politics: Dance Revived, Reconstructed, Remade, edited by Jordan, S., 1–20. Hampshire: Dance Books, 1–20.Google Scholar
Bauer, E. 2007. “Becoming Room, Becoming Mac, New Artistic Identities in the Transnational Brussels Dance Community.” Maska 22: 58–67.Google Scholar
Bauer, U. 2008. “Jérôme Bel: An Interview.” Performance Research 13, no. 1: 42–48.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bench, H. 2016. “Dancing in Digital Archives: Circulation, Pedagogy, Performance.” In Transmission in Motion: The Technologizing of Dance, edited by Bleeker, M., 154–67. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Bench, H. 2020. Perpetual Motion: Dance, Digital Cultures, and the Common. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.Google Scholar
Blades, H. 2019. “Projects, Precarity and the Ontology of Dance Works.” Dance Research Journal 51, no. 1: 66–78.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Blades, H. 2021. “Coming Together by Moving Apart: Contemporary Dance Scores and Communities during the COVID-19 Pandemic.” International Journal of Screendance 12: 50–71.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Blades, H., and Meehan, E., eds. 2018. Performing Process: Sharing Dance and Choreographic Practice. Bristol, UK: Intellect.Google Scholar
Bleeker, M. 2017. “(Re) enacting Thinking in Movement.” In Franko, Oxford Handbook, 215–28.Google Scholar
Bourdieu, P. 1984. Distinction: A Social Critique of the Judgement of Taste. Translated by Nice, R.. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Burt, R. 2017. Ungoverning Dance: Contemporary European Dance Theatre and the Commons. New York: Oxford University PressGoogle Scholar
Conroy, R. 2013. “The Beat Goes On: Reconsidering Dance Work Identity.” In Thinking through Dance: The Philosophy of Dance Performance and Practices, edited by Bunker, J., Pakes, A., and Rowell, B., 102–26. Hampshire: Dance Books.Google Scholar
Cvejić, B. 2015. “From Odd Encounters to a Prospective Confluence: Dance-Philosophy.” Performance Philosophy 1, no. 1: 7–23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Davies, D. 2011. Philosophy of the Performing Arts. London: Wiley-Blackwell.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Derrida, J. 1991. Given Time: I. Counterfeit Money. Translated by Kamuf, P.. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Dillon, E. 2014. New World Drama: The Performative Commons in the Atlantic World, 1649–1849. Durham, NC: Duke University Press.Google Scholar
Franko, M. 2004. “Given Movement: Dance and the Event.” In Of the Presence of the Body: Essays on Dance and Performance Theory. edited by Lepecki, A., 113–23. Middletown, CT: Wesleyan University Press.Google Scholar
Franko, M., ed. 2017. The Oxford Handbook of Dance and Reenactment. New York: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Garafola, L. 2017. “A Century of Rites: The Making of an Avant-Garde Tradition.” In The Rite of Spring at 100, edited by Neff, S., Carr, M., Horlacher, G., Walsh, S., and Reef, J., 17–28. Indiana: Indiana University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Giguere, M. 2019. “Dance Trends: Choreographic Plagiarism: When Does Borrowing Become Stealing?” Dance Education in Practice 5, no. 1: 29–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Goodman, N. 1976. Languages of Art: An Approach to a Theory of Symbols. Indianapolis: Hackett.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gottschild, B. D. (1996) 1998. Digging the Africanist Presence in American Performance: Dance and Other Contexts. Westport, CT: Praeger.Google Scholar
Hardin, G. 1968. “The Tragedy of the Commons.” Science (new series) 162, no. 3859: 1243–48.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hess, C., and Ostrom, E.. 2007. Understanding Knowledge as a Commons: From Theory to Practice. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Jeeves, T. 2016. “The Author of the Gift: The Practice of Authorship.” In Collaboration in Performance Practice: Premises, Workings and Failures, edited by Colin, N. and Sachsenmaier, S., 158–78. London: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
Kraut, A. 2016. Choreographing Copyright: Race, Gender, and Intellectual Property Rights in American Dance. London: Oxford University PressGoogle Scholar
Kwan, S. 2017. “When Is Contemporary Dance?” Dance Research Journal 49, no. 3: 38–52.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Laermans, R. 2015. Moving Together: Making and Theorizing Contemporary Dance. Amsterdam: Valiz.Google Scholar
Leach, J. 2014. “Choreographic Objects: Contemporary Dance, Digital Creations and Prototyping Social Visibility.” Journal of Cultural Economy 4: 458–75.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Louppe, L. 2010. Poetics of Contemporary Dance. Translated by Gardner, S.. Hampshire: Dance Books.Google Scholar
Mauss, M. (1923–24) 1950. “Essai sur le don. Forme et Raison de l’Echange dans le Sociétés Archaïques.” In Sociologie et Anthropologie. Paris: PUF.Google Scholar
Mauss, M. 1990. The Gift: The Form and Reason for Exchange in Archaic Societies. Translated by Halls, W. D.. New York: Norton.Google Scholar
McFee, G. 1992. Understanding Dance. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
McFee, G. 2011. The Philosophical Aesthetics of Dance: Identity, Performance and Understanding. Hampshire: Dance Books.Google Scholar
Meskin, A. 1999. “Productions, Performances and their Evaluation.” In Dance, Education and Philosophy, edited by McFee, G., 45–62. Oxford: Meyer & Meyer Sport.Google Scholar
Ostrom, E. 1990. Governing the Commons: The Evolution of Institutions for Collective Life. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pakes, A. 2013. “The Plausibility of a Platonist Ontology of Dance.” In Thinking through Dance: The Philosophy of Dance Performance and Practices, edited by Bunker, J., Pakes, A., and Rowell, B., 84–101. Hampshire: Dance Books.Google Scholar
Pakes, A. 2017. “Reenactment, Dance Identity and Historical Fictions.” in Franko, Oxford Handbook, 79–100.Google Scholar
Pakes, A. 2020. Choreography Invisible: The Disappearing Work of Dance. New York: Oxford University PressCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pouillaude, F. 2017. Unworking Choreography: The Notion of the Work in Dance. Translated by Pakes, A.. New York: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rubidge, S. 2000. “Identity in Flux: A Theoretical and Choreographic Enquiry into the Identity of the Open Dance Work.” PhD diss., City University, London.Google Scholar
Singer, B. 1984. “In Search of Adequate Protection for Choreographic Works: Legislative and Judicial Alternatives versus the Custom of the Dance Community.” University of Miami Law Review 38, no. 2: 287–319.Google Scholar
Van Camp, J. 1998. “Ontology of Dance.” In Oxford Encyclopaedia of Aesthetics, edited by Kelly, M., 399–402. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Van Camp, J. 2006. “A Pragmatic Approach to the Identity of Works of Art.” Journal of Speculative Philosophy 20, no. 10: 42–55.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Van Camp, J. 2019. “Identity in Dance: What Happened?” Midwest Studies in Philosophy 44: 81–91.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Whatley, S., Waelde, C., Brown, A., and Harmon, S.. 2015. “Validation and Virtuosity: Perspectives on Difference and Authorship/Control in Dance.” Choreographic Practices 6, no. 1: 59–83.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wilson, J. 2010. “Ontology and the Regulation of Intellectual Property.” The Monist 93, no. 3: 450–63.CrossRefGoogle Scholar