Dance, Feminism, and the Critique of the Visual

  • Roger Copeland

Abstract

One of the most radical and decisive differences between nineteenth-century ballet and early modern dance is so obvious that its far-reaching implications are easily overlooked: the early moderns, almost all of whom began their choreographic careers by creating solos for themselves, were using their own unballetic bodies rather than someone else’s body as the raw material of their art. It is significant that — at least in conversation — we continue to refer to artists such as Martha Graham or Mary Wigman as modern dancers — not modern dance choreographers. This habit of speech has the effect of emphasising how often these choreographers tended to perform in their own dances. They didn’t stand apart from the choreography and view it as external to themselves. In nineteenth-century ballet by contrast, the choreographer — almost invariably a man — imposed abstract patterns on the bodies of others (usually women). There is, after all, no male equivalent for the corps de ballet; and the choreographer who manipulates that corps stands apart from his creation.

Keywords

Luminate Mast Univer Fetishism Exhibitionism 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Bibliography

  1. R. Barthes, Critical Essays, trans. Richard Howard, (Evanston, Ill.: Northwestern University Press, 1972).Google Scholar
  2. J. Berger, Ways of Seeing (London: BBC and Penguin Books, 1972).Google Scholar
  3. N. O. Brown, Love’s Body (New York: Vintage Books, 1966).Google Scholar
  4. J. Culler, On Deconstruction (Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 1982).Google Scholar
  5. R. Copeland and M. Cohen (eds), What Is Dance? (New York: Oxford University Press, 1983).Google Scholar
  6. M. Decter, The New Chastity and Other Arguments Against Women’s Liberation (New York: Coward, McCann & Deoghegan, 1977).Google Scholar
  7. T. Gautier, The Romantic Ballet As Seen By Théophile Gautier (London: C. W. Beaumont, 1932).Google Scholar
  8. M. Green, Children of the Sun (New York: Basic Books, 1976).Google Scholar
  9. L. Irigaray, Speculum, de l’autre femme, (Paris: Minuit, 1974).Google Scholar
  10. L. Lippard, From the Center: Feminist Essays on Women’s Art (New York: Dutton, 1976).Google Scholar
  11. G. Mast and M. Cohen, Film Theory and Criticism, 4th edn (New York: Oxford University Press, 1972).Google Scholar
  12. M. McLuhan, The Guttenberg Galaxy (New York: New American Library, 1962).Google Scholar
  13. L. Mulvey, ‘Visual Pleasure and Narrative Cinema’, Screen, Vol. 16, No. 3, 1975.Google Scholar
  14. C. Owens, ‘Feminists and Postmodernism’ in H. Foster, Postmodern Culture (London: Pluto Press, 1985) pp. 57–82.Google Scholar
  15. Y. Rainer, Work: 1961–73 (Halifax: Press of the Nova Scotia College of Art and Design, 1974).Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Palgrave Macmillan, a division of Macmillan Publishers Limited 1993

Authors and Affiliations

  • Roger Copeland

There are no affiliations available

Personalised recommendations