Advertisement

Considering the Relationship Between Digitally Mediated Audience Engagement and the Dance-Making Process

  • Laura Griffiths
  • Ben Walmsley
Chapter

Abstract

This chapter explores the integration of audience feedback via a digitally mediated platform during the creative process of three new pieces of dance. It considers how attempts to forge empathetic relationships between artists and audiences through digitally mediated interactions intersect with the dance-making process. These themes are explored through analysis of data gathered during the development of Respond (February 2014–15), a digital adaptation of Liz Lerman’s Critical Response Process (2002). The Respond platform mediates interaction between audience and artist, taking them on a structured journey of critical enquiry to deepen their insights into the development of creative and artistic projects. The chapter articulates Respond’s role in innovating digitally-mediated modes of audience engagement and empathy towards the dance work, whilst also benefitting the creative process.

References

  1. Bermudez, Bertha, and deLahunta, Scott. 2010. [NOTATION] rtrsrch 2 (2). Accessed 7 November. http://insidemovementknowledge.net/reference/reading/.
  2. Bishop, Claire. 2004. Antagonism and Relational Aesthetics. October 110: 51–79.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Bleeker, Maaike. 2010.What If This Were an Archive? [NOTATION] rtrsrch 2 (2). Accessed 7 November 2015. http://insidemovementknowledge.net/reference/reading/.
  4. Boorsma, Miranda. 2006. A Strategic Logic for Arts Marketing: Integrating Customer Value and Artistic Objectives. The International Journal of Cultural Policy 12 (1): 73–92.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Borstel, John. 2003. Liz Lerman Dance Exchange: An Aesthetic of Inquiry, an Ethos of Dialogue. Animating Democracy. Accessed 30 October 2015. http://animatingdemocracy.org/sites/default/files/documents/labs/dance_exchange_case_study.pdf.
  6. Brown, Alan S., and Jennifer L. Novak. 2007. Assessing the Intrinsic Impacts of a Live Performance. San Francisco, CA: WolfBrown.Google Scholar
  7. Conner, L. 2013. Audience Engagement and the Role of Arts Talk in the Digital Era. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Department for Culture Media and Sport. 2007. Culture on Demand: Ways to Engage a Broader Audience. London: Department for Culture, Media and Sport.Google Scholar
  9. Foster, Susan Leigh. 2011. Choreographing Empathy: Kinesthesia in Performance. Oxon: Routledge.Google Scholar
  10. Grönroos, Christian. 2011. Value Co-creation in Service Logic: A Critical Analysis. Marketing Theory 11 (3): 279–301.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. deLahunta, Scott, and Norah Zuniga Shaw. 2006. Constructing Memory: Creation of the Choreographic Resource. Performance Research 11 (4): 53–62.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Lerman, Liz, and John Borstel. 2003. Liz Lerman’s Critical Response Process: A Method for Getting Useful Feedback on Anything You Make, from Dance to Dessert. Takoma Park, MD: Liz Lerman Dance Exchange.Google Scholar
  13. Martin, John. 1939. Introduction to the Dance. New York: Dance Horizons.Google Scholar
  14. Melrose, Susan. 2007. Not Yet, and Already No Longer: Loitering with Intent Between the Expert Practitioner at Work, and the Archive. Accessed 16 October 2015. http://www.sfmelrose.org.uk.
  15. Meyer, Eric T., and Isis Hjorth. 2013. Digitally Scratching New Theatre. London’s Battersea Arts Centre Engaging Via the Web. London: Nesta.Google Scholar
  16. Popat, Sita. 2006. Invisible Connections: Dance, Choreography and Internet Communities. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  17. Reason, Matthew, and Dee Reynolds. 2010. Kinesthesia, Empathy, and Related Pleasures: An Inquiry into Audience Experiences of Watching Dance. Dance Research Journal 42 (2): 49–75.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Reynolds, Dee, and Matthew Reason, eds. 2012. Kinesthetic Empathy in Creative and Cultural Practices. Bristol: Intellect Ltd.Google Scholar
  19. Scratchr. n.d.. http://www.scratchr.net. Accessed 15 October 2015.
  20. Walmsley, Ben. 2013. Co-creating Theatre: Authentic Engagement or Inter-legitimation? Cultural Trends 22 (2): 108–118.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Whatley, Sarah. 2012. The Poetics of Motion Capture and Visualization Techniques: The Differences Between Watching Real and Virtual Dancing Bodies. In Kinesthetic Empathy in Creative and Cultural Practices, ed. D. Reynolds and M. Reason. Bristol: Intellect Ltd.Google Scholar
  22. Whatley, Sarah, and Ross Varney. 2010. Siobhan Davies Dance Online: The Digital Archive and Documenting the Dance Making Process. In Capturing the Essence of Performance, ed. N. Leclercq, L. Rossion, and A. Jones. Brussels: Peter Lang.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Laura Griffiths
    • 1
  • Ben Walmsley
    • 2
  1. 1.School of Film, Music and Performing ArtsLeeds Beckett UniversityLeedsUK
  2. 2.School of Performance and Cultural IndustriesUniversity of LeedsLeedsUK

Personalised recommendations