Ethics in Practice

  • Fiona Bannon


Here, we start by acknowledging that the complexity involved in recognising and revealing the detailed nature of anyone’s creative process. It is a fascinating arena with respect to the processes and social interactions that are involved in bringing the work into practical existence. To understand more of what goes on in generating jointly made work, we explore traces of process that remain after a performance is complete. We return to the varied experiences that coalesce in terms of influence upon the identity of the work. Examples are drawn from a range of company practices that offer an array of perceptions that operate between the forces at play as people explore ways to bring new understanding into existence in the many forms of performance.


  1. Albright, A. (1993). Through yours to mine and back again. Reflections on bodies in motion. Movement Research Journal, Fall, 1993, pp. 288–291.Google Scholar
  2. Albright, A. (2013). Engaging bodies: The politics and poetics of corporeality. 1st ed. Middleton: Wesleyan University Press.Google Scholar
  3. Banes, S. (1981). Earthly bodies: Judson dance theater. In: Judson dance theater: 1962–1966 The Bennington College Judson project. VT: Bennington College, pp. 14–19.Google Scholar
  4. Banes, S. (1987). Terpsichore in sneakers. 1st ed. Middletown: Wesleyan University Press.Google Scholar
  5. Bannerman, C., Soafer, J. and Watt, J. (Eds). (2006). Navigating the unknown: The creative process in contemporary performing arts. Middlesex: Middlesex University Press.Google Scholar
  6. Bateson, G. (1982). Steps to an ecology of mind. 2nd ed. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  7. Bateson, G. (2000). Steps to an ecology of mind. 2nd ed. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  8. Behnke, E. (1997). Ghost gestures: Phenomenological investigations of bodily micromovements and their Intercorporeal implications. Human Studies, 20, pp. 181–201.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Behnke, E. (2009). Bodily potentiality. Husserl Studies, 25(3), pp. 185–217.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Beuys, J. and Tisdall, C. (1974). Art into society, society into art. London: ICA, p. 48.Google Scholar
  11. Brown, A. and Wetherell, M. (2007). Trial. Plymouth: University of Plymouth.Google Scholar
  12. Carter, G. (2017). Rosemary Lee Homepage.
  13. Collard-Stokes, G. (2017). Finding common ground through language and movement: Examining the role of the writer in Rosemary Lee’s The Suchness of Heni and Eddie. Research in Dance Education.Google Scholar
  14. Cull, L. (2009). Deleuze and performance. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.Google Scholar
  15. Deleuze, G. and Guattari, F. (2008). A thousand plateaus. London: Bloomsbury.Google Scholar
  16. Dempster, E. (2008). The choreography of the pedestrian. Performance Research, 13(1), pp. 23–28.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Deufert, K., Noeth, S. and Plischke, T. (2009). Monstrum. A book on reportable portraits. Hamburg: Gemeinschaftspraxis.Google Scholar
  18. Dewey, J. (1927). The public and its problems. New York: Henry Holt Co.Google Scholar
  19. Dunning, J. (2011). Somethings come to mind: Imagination, sensation, space, and the body – An impressionistic amble after Steve Paxton and the revision of Ave due. In: J. Fabius and S. Doruff, ed., Paxton AveNue, a revisioning, 1st ed. Amsterdam: ARTI, pp. 81–95.Google Scholar
  20. Edelman, G. (2000). The remembered present. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
  21. Ellsworth, E. (2005). Places of learning. New York: RoutledgeFalmer.Google Scholar
  22. Elseworth Todd, M. (1937). The thinking body. A study of balancing forces of dynamic man. 1st ed. New York: P.B. Hoeber. Inc.Google Scholar
  23. Fischlin, D. (2015). Improvised responsibility: Opening statements (call and) responsibility: Improvisation, ethics, co-creation. In: R. Caines and A. Heble, ed., The improvisation reader, 1st ed. Abingdon/New York: Routledge, pp. 289–295.Google Scholar
  24. Forsythe, W. (2009). Interview with William Forsythe. The Daily Telegraph, Tuesday 7, April, 2009.Google Scholar
  25. Foucault, M. and Rabinow, P. (Eds.). (1994). Ethics subjectivity and truth. The essential Work of Foucault 1954–1984, Vol. 1. New York: The New Press.Google Scholar
  26. Freeman, John. (2010). Blood, sweat & theory: Research through practice in performance. UK: Libri Publishing.Google Scholar
  27. Gardner, S. (1999). What is going on in post-modern dance?. Writings on Dance, 18/19, pp. 175–188.Google Scholar
  28. Gibson, J. (2015). The ecological approach to visual perception. New York, NY: Psychology Press.Google Scholar
  29. Goffman, I. (1959). The presentation of the self in everyday life. Garden City, NY: Doubleday.Google Scholar
  30. Greil, M., Ruhsam, M. and Solano, M. (Prod). (2012). I want to work with you because I can speak for myself, a conversation between Mariella Greil and Martina Ruhsam. [online] Available at: [Accessed 20 Mar. 2016].
  31. Habermas, J. (1962). The structural transformation of the public sphere: Inquiry into a category of Bourgeois society. Cambridge: Polity Press.Google Scholar
  32. Habermas, J. (2014). The structural transformation of the public sphere. Cambridge, UK: Polity.Google Scholar
  33. Harradine, D. and Behrndt, S. (2011). Invisible things. London: Fevered Sleep.Google Scholar
  34. Harrell, T. (2008). Interview with Meg Stuart. Available at: [Accessed 17 Mar. 2016].
  35. Hewitt, A. (2005). Social choreography: Ideology as performance in dance and everyday movement. Durham, NC: Duke University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Hickey-Moody, A. (2007). Intellectual disability, sensation and thinking through affect. In: A. Hickey-Moody and M. Peta, ed., Deleuzian encounters, 1st ed. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan, pp. 79–98.Google Scholar
  37. Hickey-Moody, A. (2014). Youth, arts, and education: Reassembling subjectivity through affect. London, United Kingdom: Routledge.Google Scholar
  38. Hupp Ramsay, M. (1991). The grand union (1970–1976). An improvisational performance group. New York: Peter Lang.Google Scholar
  39. Kaprow, A. and Kelley, J. (2003). Essays on the blurring of art and life. Berkeley, Calif.: University of California Press.Google Scholar
  40. Klein, G. (2010). Choreographic Toolkit (Choreografischer Baukasten), edited by Gabriele Klein, 2011 (with Gitta Barthel and Esther Wagner).Google Scholar
  41. Klein, G. (2013). The (micro-) politics of social choreography aesthetic and political strategies of protest and participation. In: G. Siegmund and S. Holscher, ed., Dance, politics & co-immunity. Thinking resistances current perspectives of politics and communities in the arts, Vol. 1, 1st ed. Berlin: Diaphanes, pp. 193–208.Google Scholar
  42. Klien, M. (2007). Choreography: A pattern language. Kybernetes, 36(7/8), pp. 1081–1088.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Klien, M. (2008). Choreography as an aesthetics of change. Ph.D. Edinburgh College of Art.Google Scholar
  44. Kliën, M. (2010). A future of choreography public lecture move. Choreographing you. Art Sand dance since the 1960s. London: Hayward Gallery.Google Scholar
  45. Kliën, M. (2012). Propositions: To dance differently.
  46. Kliën, M. (2014). MICHAEL KLIËN / RESOURCE. [online] Available at: [Accessed 11 Aug. 2016].
  47. Kliën, M. (2014). Sediments of an ordinary mind. Sedimentstext.
  48. Klien, M. and Valk, S. (2007). What do you choreograph at the end of the world, Zodiak: Unden Taussin Taehen. Finland: Like Publisher.Google Scholar
  49. Klien, M., Valk, S. and Gormly, J. (2008). The book of recommendations: Choreography as an aesthetics of change. [online] Available at: [Accessed 2 Aug. 2016].
  50. Laermans, R. (2015). Moving together: Making and theorizing contemporary dance. Amsterdam: Valiz.Google Scholar
  51. Lee, R. (2004). The possibilities are endless… Rosemary Lee. Animated, making dance matter. Focus on methodology. Spring 2004.
  52. Lee, R. (2006). Expectant waiting. In: C. Bannerman, J. Sofaer and J. Watt, ed., Navigating the unknown: The creative process in contemporary performing arts, pp. 158–185.Google Scholar
  53. Lee, R. (2017). People dancing – Foundation for community dance: The possibilities are endless…. [online] Available at: [Accessed 13 Jul. 2016].
  54. Lee, R. and Pollard, N. (2004a). Dance and Performance Ethnography Forum De Montfort University, 24 January 2004.
  55. Lee, R. and Pollard, N. J. (2004b). ResCen: Rosemary Lee & Niki Pollard Interview 2004 – The Suchness of Heni and Eddie. [online] Available at: [Accessed 7 May 2016].
  56. Lee, R. and Pollard, N. (2017). Passage. [online] Available at: [Accessed 5 Jul. 2015].
  57. Lee, R., Pollard, N. J., Hale, H. and Nixon, E. (2002). The Suchness of Eddie and Heni. Nightwalking: Greenwich Dance Agency and South Bank Centre, 28th September, 2002.Google Scholar
  58. Levinas, E. (2013). Otherwise than being or beyond essence (trans. A. Lingis). Pittsburgh: Duquesne University Press.Google Scholar
  59. Lockhart, S. (2015). On collaboration: In conversation with Sabine Eckmann// 2012. In: W. Beshty, ed., Ethics, 1st ed. Cambridge, MA, United States: Mit Press, pp. 182–184.Google Scholar
  60. Luckett, H. (2010). William Forsythe City of abstracts (2000) and the fact of the matter (2009). In: Move. Choreographing you: Art and design since the 1960’s, 1st ed. London: Hayward Publishing, pp. 104–107.Google Scholar
  61. Murdoch, I. (1956). Vision and choice in morality. Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society, 30(supp.), pp. 35–58.Google Scholar
  62. Nicholls, T. (2012). An ethics of improvisation. Lanham: Lexington Books.Google Scholar
  63. Oliver, K. (2001). Witnessing. 1st ed. Minneapolis: University of Minneapolis Press.Google Scholar
  64. Oliver, K. (2015). Witnessing, recognition, and response ethics. Philosophy and Rhetoric, 48(4), pp. 473–493.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. Paxton, S. (1972). The Grand Union. [online] Available at: [Accessed 24 Oct. 2017].
  66. Paxton, S. (1984). Still moving. Contact Quarterly, 9(2), p. 7.Google Scholar
  67. Paxton, S. (2003). Nothing comes to mind: mindscape and the space: An amble. Contact Quarterly, 28(2) Summer/Fall 2003.Google Scholar
  68. Paxton, S. (2017). Brown in the new body. In: H. Teicher, ed., Trisha Brown. Dance and art in dialogue, 19612001. Cambridge, Massachusetts: The MIT Press.Google Scholar
  69. Peeters, J., Stuart, M. and Goods, D. (2010). Meg Stuart: Are we here yet? Damaged goods. Dijon: Les Presse Du Reel.Google Scholar
  70. Peters, C., Siegal, R. and Sixt, D., (Eds). (2011). Idea in action: The Bakery. Leipzig: Spector Books.
  71. Peters, G. (2003). The aestheticization of research in the thought of Maurice Blanchot. International Journal of Education and the Arts, 4(3), pp.
  72. Pink, S. (2001). Doing visual ethnography: Images, media, and representation in research. Thousand Oaks, Calif: SAGE Publications.Google Scholar
  73. Pink, S. (2007). Doing visual ethnography: Images, media, and representation in research. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  74. Pink, S. (2012). Doing visual ethnography. London: Sage.Google Scholar
  75. Pollard, N. J. (2009). The role of the observer. Interviewed by G. Collard-Stokes. Coventry. December. In: CollardStokes, (2012). Finding common ground through language and movement: Examining the role of the writer in Rosemary Lee’s The Suchness of Heni and Eddie. Research in Dance Education, 13(2), pp. 215–234.Google Scholar
  76. Readings, B. (1996). The University in Ruins. 1st ed. Cambridge, MA.: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  77. Rouhiainen, L. (2012a). From body psychotherapy to a performative installation environment: A collaborating performer’s point of view. In: S. Ravn and L. Rouhiainen, ed., Dance spaces: Practices of movement. 1st ed. Copenhagen: University of Southern Denmark, pp. 137–160.Google Scholar
  78. Rouhiainen, L. (2012b). An investigation into facilitating the work of the independent contemporary dancer through somatic psychology. Journal of Dance and Somatic Practice, 3(1 & 2), pp. 43–60.Google Scholar
  79. Rubidge, S. (2009). Performing installations: Towards an understanding of choreography and performativity in interactive installations. In: J. Butterworth and L. Wildschut, ed., Contemporary choreography. London: Routledge, pp. 596–623.Google Scholar
  80. Rusham, M. (2011). Collaborative praxis: Choreography. Wein-Berlin: Verlag Turia & Kant.Google Scholar
  81. Schröder…Barbara. (2007). Catherine Sullivan and Meg Stuart. Available at: [Accessed 17 Mar. 2016].
  82. Sgorbati, S. (2005). Essay on emergent improvisation. [online] Available at: [Accessed 12 Sep. 2016].
  83. Sgorbati, S. (2008). How deep and broad are the laws of emergence?. [online] Available at: [Accessed 20 Jan. 2017].
  84. Sgorbati, S., Climer, E. and Hass, M. (2013). Emergent Improvisation CQ Chapbook 4. [online]. Available at: [Accessed 15 Sep. 2016].
  85. Stark Smith, N. (2013). In: E. Boxberger and G. Wittmann, ed., Partnering documentation: Approaching dance, heritage, culture: 3rd Dance Education Biennale 2012 Frankfurt am Main. Munich: e-podium.Google Scholar
  86. Sullivan, C. and Stuart, M. (2008). BOMB magazine – Catherine Sullivan and Meg Stuart. [online] Available at: [Accessed 3 Mar. 2016].
  87. T’Jonck, P. (2011). Other times, other morals. In: J. Fabius and S. Doruff, ed., Paxton Ave Nue, a revisioning. Amsterdam: ARTI, pp. 18–29.Google Scholar
  88. Touré, D. (2013). Ideas, tension and impulse. Mathilde-improvised music and dance: Non-consensus in collaboration and manifestations in practice. MA. University of Leeds.Google Scholar
  89. Waterhouse, E. (2010). Dancing amidst the Forsythe company space, enactment and living repertory. In: G. Brandstetter and B. Wiens, ed., Theatre without vanishing points: The legacy of Adolphe Appia: Scenography and choreography in contemporary theatre, 1st ed. Berlin: Alexander Verlag, pp. 153–181.Google Scholar
  90. Zepke, S. (2005). Art as abstract machines: Ontology and aesthetics in delouse and Guattari. London: Routledge.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Fiona Bannon
    • 1
  1. 1.University of LeedsLeedsUK

Personalised recommendations