Advertisement

Enacting Lecoq pp 183-205 | Cite as

Conclusion: “Beautiful, Beautiful, but Where Are You Going?”

  • Maiya Murphy
Chapter
Part of the Cognitive Studies in Literature and Performance book series (CSLP)

Abstract

Murphy outlines how an enaction-Lecoq conversation can be beneficial to both research in Lecoq pedagogy and the development of the enactive paradigm. She explains how enacting Lecoq pedagogy can dispel confusion over and myths about the movement-based training. In addition, she asserts how applying Lecoq pedagogical insights to enaction may keep the cognitive approach grounded in a dynamic conception of embodied emergence. Murphy concludes her discussion by suggesting how Lecoq pedagogy is both epistemological and ontological, and shows how the pedagogy proposes its own continuity of life and creativity. Through suggestions of practical and theoretical interventions, Murphy elucidates how Lecoq’s notion that “everything moves” could shape enactive research.

References

  1. Chamberlain, Franc, and Ralph Yarrow, eds. 2002. Jacques Lecoq and the British Theatre. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  2. Columbetti, Giovanna. 2014. The Feeling Body: Affective Science Meets the Enactive Mind. Cambridge: MIT Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Di Paolo, Ezequiel A., Marieke Rohde, and Hanne De Jaegher. 2010. Horizons for the Enactive Mind: Values, Social Interaction, and Play. In Enaction: Toward a New Paradigm for Cognitive Science, eds. John Stewart, Olivier Gapenne, and Ezequiel A. Di Paolo, 33–87. Cambridge: MIT.Google Scholar
  4. Fischer-Lichte, Erika. 2008. The Transformative Power of Performance: A New Aesthetics. Oxon: Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Gallagher, Shaun. 2003. Phenomenology and Experimental Design: Toward a Phenomenologically Enlightened Experimental Science. Journal of Consciousness Studies 10, no. 9–10: 85–99.Google Scholar
  6. Gallagher, Shaun, and Dan Zahavi. 2008. The Phenomenological Mind: An Introduction to Philosophy of Mind and Cognitive Science. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  7. Gapenne, Olivier. 2010. Kinesthesia and the Construction of Perceptual Objects. In Enaction: Toward a New Paradigm for Cognitive Science, eds. John Stewart, Olivier Gapenne, and Ezequiel A. Di Paolo, 183–218. Cambridge: MIT.Google Scholar
  8. Halsall, Francis. 2012. Niklas Luhmann and the Body: Irritating Social Systems. The New Bioethics 18, no. 1: 4–20.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Havelange, Véronique. 2010. The Ontological Constitution of Cognition and the Epistemological Constitution of Cognitive Science: Phenomenology, Enaction and Technology. In Enaction: Toward a New Paradigm for Cognitive Science, eds. John Stewart, Olivier Gapenne, and Ezequiel A. Di Paolo, 183–218. Cambridge: MIT.Google Scholar
  10. Jonas, Hans. 2001. The Phenomenon of Life: Toward a Philosophical Biology. Evanston: Northwestern University Press.Google Scholar
  11. Le Van Quyen, Michel. 2010. Neurodynamics and Phenomenology in Mutual Enlightenment: The Example of the Epileptic Aura. In Enaction: Toward a New Paradigm for Cognitive Science, eds. John Stewart, Olivier Gapenne, and Ezequiel A. Di Paolo, 245–266. Cambridge: MIT. Google Scholar
  12. Lecoq, Jacques. 1987. Le Théâtre du geste. Paris: Bordas.Google Scholar
  13. Lecoq, Jacques en collaboration avec Jean-Gabriel Carasso et Jean-Claude Lallias. 2016. Le Corps poétique: Un enseignement de la creation théâtrale. Paris: Actes Sud-Papiers.Google Scholar
  14. Leder, Drew. 1990. The Absent Body. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  15. Luhmann, Niklas. 2000. Art as a Social System. Trans. Eva M. Knodt. Palo Alto: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
  16. Kemp, Rick. 2016. Lecoq, Emotion and Embodied Cognition. In The Routledge Companion to Jacques Lecoq, eds. Mark Evans and Rick Kemp, 199–207. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  17. Kemp, Rick. 2017. The Embodied Performance Pedagogy of Jacques Lecoq. Connection Science 29, no. 1: 94–105.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Murphy, Maiya. 2017. Enacting the Consequences of the Lecoq Pedagogy’s Aesthetic Cognitive Foundation. Theatre Survey 58, no. 3: 326–351.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Núñez, Rafael E. Enacting Infinity: Bringing Transfinite Cardinals into Being. In Enaction: Toward a New Paradigm for Cognitive Science, eds. John Stewart, Olivier Gapenne, and Ezequiel A. Di Paolo, 307–334. Cambridge: MIT.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Proulx, Jérôme. 2008. Some Differences between Maturana and Varela’s Theory of Cognition and Constructivism. Complicity: An International Journal of Complexity and Education 5, no. 1: 11–26.Google Scholar
  21. Scott, Joanne. 2016. Intermedial Praxis and Practice as Research: ‘Doing-Thinking’ in Practice. London: Palgrave Macmillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Sheets-Johnstone, Maxine. 1999. Emotion and Movement: A Beginning Empirical-Phenomenological Analysis of Their Relationship. In Reclaiming Cognition: The primacy of Action Intention and Emotion, eds. Rafael Núñez and Walter J. Freeman, 259–277. Thorverton, UK: Imprint Academic. Google Scholar
  23. Troscianko, Emily T. 2014. Reading Kafka Enactively. Paragraph 37, no. 1: 15–31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. UCI Claire Trevor School of the Arts. “Body of Knowledge 2016 Highlights.” Filmed December 8–10 in Irvine, CA. Uploaded 11 May 2017 to YouTube video. www.youtube.com/watch?v=IXJZIvmBu6M.
  25. UCI Claire Trevor School of the Arts. “Evan Thompson.” Filmed December 8–10 in Irvine, CA. Uploaded 11 May 2017 to YouTube video. www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=202&v=rG3daqNH700.
  26. Varela, Francisco J., Evan Thompson, and Eleanor Rosch. 2017. The Embodied Mind: Cognitive Science and the Human Experience. Revised ed. Cambridge: MIT Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.National University of SingaporeSingaporeSingapore

Personalised recommendations