skip to main content
10.1145/3537972.3537986acmotherconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagesmocoConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article

“So… Will You Be Looking at Dance?”: Data-led Dance History and the Edges of Movement Computing

Authors Info & Claims
Published:30 June 2022Publication History

ABSTRACT

Dance historical analysis demands an understanding of “movement data” that includes not just data seen to represent moving bodies in terms of dancing bodies, but also representing movement itself as a way of thinking and knowing, of archiving and transmission. In this paper, we draw on experiences from running Dunham's Data: Katherine Dunham and Digital Methods for Dance History Inquiry to argue that dance history can participate in initiatives to build more expansive understandings of measurement, analysis, and representation in movement computing, in particular by addressing kinds of movement that, while not “dancing” per se, are the enabling conditions for dance. We begin with contexts for a data-led dance history, and then elaborate the methods in terms of building, analyzing, and visualizing datasets that focus on transnational, intercorporeal, and intergenerational transmission of dance-based knowledge practices. We collect key findings regarding the capacity of such methodologies to expand the scope of historical movement inquiry, and in turn, to rethink the complexity of embodiment in a broader range of digital analytical contexts. Finally, the conclusion touches on further research, including the sensory potential of visualizing historical dance data in and as movement.

References

  1. Arola, Kristin L., and Anne Frances Wysocki, eds. 2012. Composing(Media) = Composing(Embodiment): Bodies, Technologies, Writing, the Teaching of Writing. Logan, Utah: Utah State University Press.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  2. Balme, Christopher. 2019. The Globalization of Theatre 1870–1930: The Theatrical Networks of Maurice E. Bandmann. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  3. Batiste, Stephanie L. 2007. “Dunham Possessed: Ethnographic Bodies, Movement, and Transnational Constructions of Blackness.” Journal of Haitian Studies 13 (2): 8–22.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  4. Bay-Cheng, Sarah. 2016. “Digital Historiography and Performance.” Theatre Journal 68 (4): 507–27.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  5. Bench, Harmony, and Kate Elswit. 2016. “Mapping Movement on the Move: Dance Touring and Digital Methods.” Theatre Journal 68 (4): 575–96.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  6. Bench, Harmony, and Kate Elswit. 2019. “Checking In: The Flows of Dunham's Performers.” Dunham's Data Research Blog (blog). March 28, 2019. https://dunhamsdata.org/blog/checking-in-the-flows-of-dunhams-performers.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  7. Bench, Harmony, and Kate Elswit 2020a. “Katherine Dunham's Global Method and the Embodied Politics of Dance's Everyday.” Theatre Survey 61: 305–30.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  8. Bench, Harmony, and Kate Elswit. 2020b. “Dunham's Data: Katherine Dunham and Digital Methods for Dance Historical Inquiry, Everyday Itinerary, 1950-1953.” ICPSR - Interuniversity Consortium for Political and Social Research. https://doi.org/10.3886/ICPSR37698.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  9. Bench, Harmony, and Kate Elswit. 2022a. “Visceral Data for Dance Histories: Katherine Dunham's People, Places, and Pieces.” TDR 66 (1): 39–63.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  10. Bench, Harmony, and Kate Elswit. 2022b. “The Body Is Not (Only) a Metaphor: Rethinking Embodiment in DH.” In Debates in the Digital Humanities 2022. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  11. Bench, Harmony, Kate Elswit, and Antonio Jiménez-Mavillard. 2022. “Connectivity vs. Canonicity: Data Science and Dance Studies in Historical Dialogue.” In .Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  12. Bench, Harmony, Kate Elswit, Antonio Jiménez-Mavillard, and Tia-Monique Uzor. 2021. “A Nested Hierarchy of Katherine Dunham's Dance Company Repertory.” In . https://dunhamsdata.org/blog/ach2021.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  13. Blades, Hetty, and Scott de LaHunta. 2020. “Digital Aptitude: Finding the Right Questions for Dance Studies.” In Routledge International Handbook of Research Methods in Digital Humanities, edited by Kristen Schuster and Stuart Dunn, 31–45. London: Routledge.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  14. Bollen, Jonathan, and Julie Holledge. 2011. “Hidden Dramas: Cartographic Revelations in the World of Theatre Studies.” The Cartographic Journal 48 (4): 226–36.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  15. Brown, Jayna. 2008. Babylon Girls: Black Women Performers and the Shaping of the Modern. Durham, NC: Duke University Press.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  16. Brüggerman, Victoria, Mark-Jan Bludau, and Marian Dörk. 2020. “The Fold: Rethinking Interactivity in Data Visualization” 14 (3). http://www.digitalhumanities.org/dhq/vol/14/3/000487/000487.html.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  17. Candelario, Rosemary. 2018. “Choreographing American Dance Archives: Artist-Driven Archival Projects by Eiko & Koma, Bebe Miller Company, and Jennifer Monson.” Dance Research Journal 50 (1): 80–102.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  18. Caplan, Debra. 2016. “Reassessing Obscurity: The Case for Big Data in Theatre History.” Theatre Journal 68 (4): 555–73.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  19. Carlson, Kristin, Sarah Fdili Alaoui, Greg Corness, and Thecla Schiphorst. 2019. “Shifting Spaces: Using Defamiliarization to Design Choreographic Technologies That Support Co-Creation.” In Proceedings of the 6th International Conference on Movement and Computing, 1–8. Tempe AZ USA: ACM. https://doi.org/10.1145/3347122.3347140.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  20. Cisneros, Rosemary E., Kathryn Stamp, Sarah Whatley, and Karen Wood. 2019. “WhoLoDancE: Digital Tools and the Dance Learning Environment.” Research in Dance Education 20 (1): 54–72. https://doi.org/10.1080/14647893.2019.1566305.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  21. Clark, VèVè A. 1994. “Performing the Memory of Difference in Afro-Caribbean Dance: Katherine Dunham's Choreography, 1938–87,.” In History and Memory in African-American Culture, edited by Geneviève Fabre and Robert O'Meally, 188–204. New York: Oxford University Press.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  22. Clark, VèVè A, and Sarah E. Johnson, eds. 2005. Kaiso! Writings by and about Katherine Dunham. Madison: University of Wisconsin Press.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  23. Clarke, Kamari Maxine. 2004. Mapping Yorùbá Networks: Power and Agency in the Making of Transnational Communities. Durham, NC: Duke University Press.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  24. Cope, Meghan, and Sarah Elwood. 2009. “Introduction: Qualitative GIS: Forging Mixed Methods through Representations, Analytical Innovations, and Conceptual Engagements.” In Qualitative GIS: A Mixed Methods Approach, edited by Meghan Cope and Sarah Elwood, 1–12. London: Sage.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  25. Davies, Siobhan, Sarah Whatley, 2009. “Siobhan Davies Replay.” 2009. http://www.siobhandaviesreplay.com/.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  26. Dee Das, Joanna. 2017. Katherine Dunham: Dance and the African Diaspora. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  27. D'Ignazio, Catherine, and Lauren F. Klein. 2020. Data Feminism. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  28. Dobson, Kelly. 2012. “Data Visceralization. ‘Nine Faculty-Led Research Projects Funded by Graduate Studies.’ Rhode Island School of Design, Academic Affairs.” October 9. http://academicaffairs.risd.edu/2012/10 /nine-faculty-led-research-projects-funded-by-graduate-studies/.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  29. Dourish, Paul. 2001. Where the Action Is: The Foundations of Embodied Interaction. Cambridge, Mass: MIT Press.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  30. Drucker, Johanna. 2020. Visualization and Interpretation: Humanistic Approaches to Display. Cambridge, Massachusetts: The MIT Press.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  31. Escobar Varela, Miguel. 2021. Theater as Data: Computational Journeys Into Theater Research. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  32. Escobar Varela, Miguel, and Luis Hernández-Barraza. 2019. “Digital Dance Scholarship: Biomechanics and Culturally Situated Dance Analysis.” Digital Scholarship in the Humanities, January. https://doi.org/10.1093/llc/fqy083.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  33. Forsythe, William, and Scott de LaHunta. 2010. “Motion Bank.” 2010. http://motionbank.org/de/content/team.html.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  34. Forsythe, William, Maria Palazzi, Norah Zuniga-Shaw, 2009. “Synchronous Objects for One Flat Thing, Reproduced.” 2009. https://synchronousobjects.osu.edu/.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  35. Harrington, Christina, Sheena Erete, and Anne Marie Piper. 2019. “Deconstructing Community-Based Collaborative Design: Towards More Equitable Participatory Design Engagements.” Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction 3 (CSCW): 1–25. https://doi.org/10.1145/3359318.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  36. Jiménez-Mavillard, Antonio. 2020. “DH2020 Lightning Talk: Performer Communities within a Hyperconnected Company Network.” In . https://dunhamsdata.org/blog/dh2020-hyperconnected.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  37. Johnson, Jessica Marie. 2018. “Markup Bodies: Black [Life] Studies and Slavery [Death] Studies at the Digital Crossroads.” Social Text 36 (4): 57–79.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  38. Knowles, Anne Kelly, Tim Cole, and Alberto Giordano, eds. 2014. Geographies of the Holocaust. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  39. Kozel, Susan. 2007. Closer: Performance, Technologies, Phenomenology. Cambridge: MIT Press.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  40. LaViers, Amy, and M. Egerstedt. 2012. “Style Based Robotic Motion.” In 2012 American Control Conference (ACC), 4327–32. Montreal, QC: IEEE. https://doi.org/10.1109/ACC.2012.6315287.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  41. Losh, Elizabeth M., and Jacqueline Wernimont, eds. 2018. Bodies of Information: Intersectional Feminism and Digital Humanities. Debates in the Digital Humanities. Minneapolis ; London: University of Minnesota Press.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  42. MacIntyre, Blair, Maribeth Gandy, Steven Dow, and Jay David Bolter. 2004. “DART: A Toolkit for Rapid Design Exploration of Augmented Reality Experiences.” In .Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  43. McKittrick, Katherine. 2006. Demonic Grounds: Black Women and the Cartographies of Struggle. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  44. Miller, Derek. 2020. “Comment – Defining Repertory.” Databases, Revenues, & Repertory: The French Stage Online, 1680-1793. https://doi.org/10.21428/671d579e.306d5dff.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  45. Naccarato, Teoma, and John MacCallum. 2016. “From Representation to Relationality: Bodies, Biosensors and Mediated Environments.” Journal of Dance and Somatic Practices 8 (1): 57–72.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  46. Noland, Carrie, and Sally Ann Ness, eds. 2008. Migrations of Gesture. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  47. Osumare, Halifu. 2020. “Meditation on Memory in African Diasporic Dance and Its Transmission in the Touring Katherine Dunham Dance Company.” Dunham's Data Research Blog (blog). October 22, 2020. http://dunhamsdata.org/blog/osumare-meditation-on-memory.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  48. Otake, Eiko, and Takashi Koma Otake. 2016. “Eiko & Koma.” 2016. http://eikoandkoma.org/home.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  49. Parham, Marisa. 2016. “Digital Archives, Datum Storytelling, & the Future of Memory.” In . Library of Congress. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bxWv0pv1l40.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  50. Paxton, Steve, Andrian Baptiste, and Florence Corin. 2008. “Material for the Spine.” 2019 2008. https://www.materialforthespine.com/.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  51. Posner, Miriam. 2016. “What's Next: The Radical, Unrealized Potential of Digital Humanities.” In Debates in the Digital Humanities 2016, edited by Matthew K. Gold and Lauren F. Klein. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press. https://dhdebates.gc.cuny.edu/read/untitled/section/a22aca14-0eb0-4cc6-a622-6fee9428a357%23ch03.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  52. Robertson, Stephen, and Lincoln Mullen. 2021. “Arguing with Digital History: Patterns of Historical Interpretation.” Journal of Social History 54 (4): 1005–22.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  53. Savigliano, Marta. 1995. Tango and the Political Economy of Passion. Boulder, CO: Westview Press.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  54. Srinivasan, Priya. 2012. Sweating Saris: Indian Dance as Transnational Labor. Philadelphia: Temple University Press.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  55. Sutherland, Tonia. 2019. “Reading Gesture: Katherine Dunham, the Dunham Technique, and the Vocabulary of Dance as Decolonizing Archival Praxis.” Archival Science 19 (2): 167–83. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10502-019-09308-w.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref

Index Terms

  1. “So… Will You Be Looking at Dance?”: Data-led Dance History and the Edges of Movement Computing
      Index terms have been assigned to the content through auto-classification.

      Recommendations

      Comments

      Login options

      Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

      Sign in
      • Published in

        cover image ACM Other conferences
        MOCO '22: Proceedings of the 8th International Conference on Movement and Computing
        June 2022
        262 pages
        ISBN:9781450387163
        DOI:10.1145/3537972

        Copyright © 2022 ACM

        Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than the author(s) must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected].

        Publisher

        Association for Computing Machinery

        New York, NY, United States

        Publication History

        • Published: 30 June 2022

        Permissions

        Request permissions about this article.

        Request Permissions

        Check for updates

        Qualifiers

        • research-article
        • Research
        • Refereed limited

        Acceptance Rates

        Overall Acceptance Rate50of110submissions,45%
      • Article Metrics

        • Downloads (Last 12 months)26
        • Downloads (Last 6 weeks)0

        Other Metrics

      PDF Format

      View or Download as a PDF file.

      PDF

      eReader

      View online with eReader.

      eReader

      HTML Format

      View this article in HTML Format .

      View HTML Format