This document discusses the relationship between theatre and dance. It notes that while dance is often considered a form of theatre, some dance theorists have argued it should be considered independently. The document traces this debate historically, from Noverre in the 18th century arguing dance should adopt theatrical techniques, to later theorists like Gautier advocating for dance as an art of movement alone. It analyzes how the debate has played out cyclically, with periods favoring theatrical or non-theatrical approaches. The document argues the current resurgence of theatrical dance represents a significant shift beyond this cycle, reflecting broader changes in dance aesthetics.

1. Theatre, Dance, and Theory: A Philosophical Narrative
Author(s): Noel Carroll
Source: Dance Chronicle, Vol. 15, No. 3 (1992), pp. 317-331
Published by: Taylor & Francis, Ltd.
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/1567822
Accessed: 27/12/2008 06:22
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use, available at
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp. JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use provides, in part, that unless
you have obtained prior permission, you may not download an entire issue of a journal or multiple copies of articles, and you
may use content in the JSTOR archive only for your personal, non-commercial use.
Please contact the publisher regarding any further use of this work. Publisher contact information may be obtained at
http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=taylorfrancis.
Each copy of any part of a JSTOR transmission must contain the same copyright notice that appears on the screen or printed
page of such transmission.
JSTOR is a not-for-profit organization founded in 1995 to build trusted digital archives for scholarship. We work with the
scholarly community to preserve their work and the materials they rely upon, and to build a common research platform that
promotes the discovery and use of these resources. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.
Taylor & Francis, Ltd. is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Dance
Chronicle.
http://www.jstor.org

2. Theatre,Dance, and Theory:
A PhilosophicalNarrative
Noel Carroll
Since the eighties, as a result of developmentsin dance in Europe,
Japan, and America,criticsboth here and abroadhave writtenas if
the currentexperimentation innovativeintersections theatreand
in of
dance representssomethingepochal.' On the one hand, this could
elicit a perfunctory,skepticalresponse.One mightsay that danceor,
at least, dance art-often referredto as theatricaldancing-just is a
theatreart, and this, in turn, mightpromptthe debunkingquestion:
quot;So what is all the excitementabout?quot; That is, danceart is a species
of the genus theatre, so of course the two are related.
Nevertheless,the currentfusion of theatreand dance-in the
works of choreographers diverseas Pina Bausch, Sankai Juku,
as
TrishaBrown, and Jim Self-does seemto marka historicalturning
point that deservestheoreticalconsideration.For although it is in
somesenseobviousthat danceis a theatreart, this viewhas often been
contestedfrom withinthe provinceof danceby voices clamoringfor
sovereignstatehood.
Of especialrelevanceto contemporary explorationsof the re-
lationsbetweentheatreand dance, undoubtedly,is the fact that such
an antitheatrical supplieda polemicalfoundationto muchof the
bias
influentialAmericandance of the sixties and seventies-the dance
? 1992 by Noe Carroll
317

3. 318 DANCE CHRONICLE
movementthat emergedfrom the experimentation, most notably, at
Judson Churchin New York City.2For example,in an often quoted
YvonneRainerregistered
statement, whatshe calledquot;a verylargeNO
to many of the facts in the theatretoday.quot;3 She went on to assert:
NO to spectacleno to virtuosityno to transformation magic and
and
make-believe to the glamourand transcendency the starimageno
no of
to the heroic no to the anti-heroicno to trash imageryno to involve-
ment of performer spectatorno to style no to camp no to seduction
or
of spectatorby the wilesof the performer to eccentricity to mov-
no no
ing or being moved.4
Although Rainerherselfwas quite clearthat these disavowals
a
merelyrepresented programmatic statementof the moment, rather
thana manifestoaboutthe natureof danceandits relationto theatre,5
historically,her intentionswere disregarded, and her statementwas
embraced a proclamation, a clarioncallto enlistin the puredance.
as as
What for Rainer was a forcefully articulated,but strategic
in
choice-one she freelyadmittedshe mightreconsider the future-
assumedthe status of an ontology of dance for emergingpractition-
ers and youngercritics. This is not to say that all the dance activity
that was influencedby, or thought to be influencedby, Rainerand
the JudsonChurchreallyabidedby all the eschewalsRaineragitated
for. But rather,somethinglike Rainer'sagendabecamethe basis of
the self-understanding much Americandance of the sixties and
of
early seventies6-even if manychoreographers mightrecitethese
who
commitmentsin interviewsdid not appearto respectthe quot;letter of
the lawquot; in their work.
Of course, it is in the contextof the antitheatricalism what
of
has come to be calledearlypostmoderndancethat the currentinter-
sectionof theatreand danceassumesimportance.For the antitheatri-
calism of the Judson movementhas so run its course that, indubit-
ably, that momentin dancehistoryis closedand has been so for quite
some time.
Evidencefor this is availableon all sides. Most tellingly, the
work of importantmembersof the Judson Churchmovementitself
becameincreasingly theatrical. One thinksof LucindaChilds'scollab-
orationwithRobertWilsonin Einsteinon the Beach(1977)as a water-
shedevent, while David Gordonmoved from the austereminimalism

4. THEATRE,DANCE AND THEORY 319
of SpilledMilk (1974)to avant-garde pantomimein WhatHappened
(1978) and theatricalenactmentin Framework(1983) and Murder
(1986).And coincidentwith this shift towardtheatricality the part
on
of Judsonveteransis the evidenttheatricalsensibilityof an emerging
of
generation talentedchoreographers America,Europe,and Asia,
in
includingPina Bausch,MaguyMarin,MichaelClark,MarkMorris,
Jim Self, Eiko and Koma, and many others.
Thus, we find ourselvesat a point sufficientlypast the time in
whichthe antitheatricalism the sixtieswas compellingthat we now
of
feel confident in discussingthe new theatricality.The king is dead,
so to speak;long live the king. Therecan be no questionthat we have
witnessedan aesthetictransition,a shift in artisticparadigms,if you
will. How can this be explained?
The first explanation that comesto mindis somewhatcynical,
although not altogetherunreasonable.It goes like this: a brief look
at the historyof what we shall call quot;danceart in the modernperiodquot;
revealssomethinglike a cyclicalstructure,in whichepisodesof thea-
tricalismare followed by episodes of antitheatricalism which, then,
are followed by renewedclaims for theatricalism.7
The cynicalview suggeststhat dancehistoryis like a dog chas-
ing its own tail; theatricalism followed by antitheatricalism,
is which
is followed by theatricalism to changemetaphors,a constantre-
in,
inventionof the wheel, as successive generationsrediscover dance
that
is theatricalor that it is not theatrical,dependingwhereone situates
oneself in the cycle. The explanationof why we presentlyfind our-
selves amid an epoch of theatricalism simplythat the best articu-
is
latedview of what was perceivedto be the dominanttendencyof the
precedingperiod-whether or not this view was reallyaccurate-was
antitheatricalism. accountis cynical,of course,becauseit repre-
This
sentsdancehistoryas a continuingfailureof imaginationor, at least,
of self-consciousness.
In orderto flesh out the cynicalview, let us begin in the eigh-
teenthcentury,wherewe find JohnWeaverandJean-Georges Noverre
attempting securea place for dancein the systemof the artsby ad-
to
vocatingthat danceforsakeits ornamentalism airsand becomean
and
art of imitation.Noverre,for example,writesthat quot;A well-composed
balletis a livingpictureof the passions,manner,customs,ceremonies
and customs of all nations of the globe .. .quot;8 And, he argues, ballets

5. 320 DANCE CHRONICLE
mustbe devisedwith actionin orderto achievethis purpose.9 other
In
words,dancemustbecometheatre-ratherthana collectionof charm-
ing steps-if it is to be taken seriously.
However, despite the authorityof Noverre and his case for
dance theatricalism,a minorityposition, which was at times to be-
come a majorityposition, gradually arose, whichdiscountedthe nar-
rative, mimeticconceptualization the dance and which advocated
of
that dance be thought of primarily terms of movement.In 1837,
in
in a reviewof FannyElsslerin the partof Alcinein La Tempete, Theo-
phile Gautierdeclaims,quot;After all, dancingconsistsof nothingmore
than the art of displayingbeautifulshapesin gracefulpositions and
the developmentfrom them of lines agreeableto the eye; it is mute
rhythm,music that is seen. Dancingis little adaptedto rendermeta-
physicalthemes.quot;'?(Undoubtedly, thereis some ironyin the fact that
this quotation can be and has been cited as a reactionto Noverre's
aesthetic,eventhoughthe Romanticballet, of whichGautierwas the
major apologist, was a kind of ballet d'action.)
Thisline of criticismwouldeventually givenits most power-
be
ful expressionby Andre Levinson, who regardedNoverre'sbrief as
quot;Aristotelian but
sophistry,quot;and who, claimingnot only Gautier also
Stephane Mallarmeand Paul Valeryas fellow-travelers,maintained
that the essentialcore or appreciativenerveof dancewas movement.quot;1
In what must be read as the exasperation a proponentof what we
of
now might call pure dance with the theatricalstanceof Noverreand
his followers, Levinsonwrites:
I can not think of anyonewho has devotedhimselfto those character-
istics which belong exclusivelyto dancing,or who has endeavoredto
formulate specifically the laws of this art on its own ground .. . [N]o
one has evertried to portraythe intrinsicbeautyof the dancestep, its
innate quality, its esthetic reason for being . . . it is the desire of the
dancerto createbeautywhichcauseshim to makeuse of his knowledge
of mechanicsand that finally dominatesthis knowledge.He subjects
his musclesto a rigiddiscipline;
througharduouspracticehe bendsand
adaptshis body to the exigencies an abstract perfectform. 2(em-
of and
phasisadded)
The rejectionof the conceptionof danceas a variantof thea-
tricalimitation,a rejectionthat was voicedby the Gautier-Mallarme-

6. THEATRE,DANCE AND THEORY 321
Valery-Levinson line, is echoed, although from somewhatdifferent
philosophicalstartingpoints, by theoristsconcernedto defend what
is calledmoderndance,suchas JohnMartinand Susanne Langer.'3 K.
Both are committedto expressiontheoriesof art. Both see the sub-
stanceof dance in expressivemovement,which Martincalls quot;meta-
kinesisquot;and whichLangerlocatesin virtualpowers.For Langer,that
the scope of danceproperis delimited the domainof whatshe calls
to
virtualpowersexplicitly distinguishes fromthe drama,whereas
it Mar-
tin's view-that the arrangement dance forms is dictatedby quot;the
of
logic of innerfeelingquot;-signals a necessarydeparture from the regu-
lative standardof theatricalimitation(insofaras the logic of feeling
is differentfrom the logic of action).
Moreover,not only can we chart a consistentlyreappearing
antitheatrical reactionto the conception of dance as theatre at the
level of theory, but there is also a recurring rhetoricalfigure in the
history of dance in which innovationsare introducedby castigating
establishedforms of dance, chargingthem with havingbecomeossi-
fied in staidand outmodedconventions theatricality.
of ThusJacques
Riviere, in an expressionistpaean, defines Nijinsky's achievement
againstthe artificeof Fokine.14 And undoubtedlyone suspectsthat
YvonneRainer, at least in part, is an inheritorof this polemicalgam-
bit. But at the sametime it has also been possibleto mobilizethe au-
thorityof theatricalimpact againstthe aestheticof pure movement,
construed mereornamentalism, MichelFokinealso does in order
as as
to distinguish himselffromwhathe notatesas quot;the so-called'classical
ballet.' quot;1 Recall Fokine's rule (his term) that quot;dancing and mimetic
gesturehave no meaningin a balletunlessthey serveas an expression
of its dramaticaction, and they mustnot be usedas a meredivertisse-
ment or entertainment, havingno connectionwith the schemeof the
whole ballet.quot;'6
This cursory,althoughI believe not tendentious,'7 reviewof
the polemicsof dance historyaffords some groundsfor what I have
calledthe quot;cynicaltakequot; on the contemporary resurgence theatri-
of
calismin dance. Undeniably,there is a kind of antiphonalstructure
in which the voices of theatricalism answeredby those of anti-
are
theatricalism,and vice versa. But a closerview of whatis involvedin
these exchanges,I think, will demonstrate that more is involvedhere
than a battle between Tweedledeeand Tweedledum,and, further-

7. 322 DANCE CHRONICLE
more, that the currentvogue of theatricalism danceis not just the
in
same old refrain.
Althoughone mightsimplymapthe significantdancetheories
of the past into alternativecategoriesof theatricalism and antithea-
tricalism, careful attentionto these theories indicatesthat they are
not merelyinvolvedin monotonousrepetition.When Noverrecalled
for danceto become a speciesof theatricalimitation,he was operat-
ing withina theoreticalcontextin whichthe reigningtheoryof art de-
fined art as mimesis.This view-obviously inheritedfrom Plato and,
especially,Aristotle-was advanced Noverre'sown time by Charles
in
8
Batteaux. For Batteaux, every art sharesthe same essentialfunc-
tion, namely,that of imitation,specificallyof the beautiful.Thus, in
orderfor danceto be considered eligiblefor membership the system
in
of the fine arts, it too had to becomean art of mimesis.Thus, it was
hardlyan accidentthat Noverreclamoredfor dance as a speciesof
theatricalimitation.19 had virtuallyno other theoreticaloption
He
for advancing causeof the dancein a philosophical
the context,where
anything that was to count as art had to be mimetic.
Moreover, Noverre's theorywasdeveloped beforethe powerful
medium-specificity theoryof thinkerslike Lessingtook hold; accord-
ing to this newertheory, as it was expanded,each genuineart form
was expectedto have a domainof uniqueeffects, often identifiedin
termsof what said art form was thoughtto represent best. Underthis
dispensation,construingdance as a form of theatre,as Aristotleand
Noverredid, would theoreticallyundermine statusof dance as a
the
genuineart form. However,as already noted, Noverredid not operate
underanything Lessing'smedium-specificity
like constraint.Thatsub-
sequent dance theoristsoften did accounts for their tenacious anti-
in
theatricalism contrastto Noverre'sseemingly unworried theatrical-
ism. For Noverre,therewas no theoretical in
liability thinking dance
of
as havingsimilar goalsto theatre its pursuit the imitation action.
in of of
If a theoryof art as mimesisstandsin the background No- of
verre'stheory, it is thinkingderivedfrom ImmanuelKant's The Cri-
that
tique of Judgement20 decisivelyshapesthe position summedup
by Levinson,but also suggested Gautierand Valery.Kant'stheory,
by
of course, is a theory of aestheticjudgmentsof beauty and the sub-
lime.Moreover, although is not explicitly theoryof art,it canbe and
it a
was turnedinto one, by theoristslike Clive Bell,21by stipulating that

8. THEATRE,DANCE AND THEORY 323
artworksare designedto elicit aestheticresponses,understood-fol-
lowingKant'sanalysisof beauty-as the agreeable,disinterested play
of our cognitiveand perceptualfacultiesin responseto form. In con-
trastto theoriesof art derivedfrom Aristotleand Batteaux,this sort
of Kantiantheory is not essentiallymimetic.Thus, as one would ex-
pect, imitationis not a centralfeatureof art here; formalpatterning
is far more important.
Spacedoes not allow for a completedemonstration the de-
of
gree to whichthe Gautier-Mallarme-Valery-Levinsonis dependent
line
on Kantianinfluences. (This is not to say that these dance theorists
necessarilyread Kant, but ratherthat Kantianideas suffused nine-
teenth-and twentieth-century thinkingabout art.) But let me make a
few suggestionsabout why I think that a kind of Kantianism informs
their perspective.Not only does the theme of the primacyof pattern
runthroughtheirdiscussion,but also Valery'sinsistenceon the quot;dis-
utilityquot; of the dance and its independencefrom practicalconcerns
corresponds the Kantianpresupposition responses the beau-
to that to
tiful are disinterested.22
Mallarme's of
attribution salutary ineffability
to the dancesymbolcorrelates the Kantian
to convictionthatthe beau-
tiful is not subsumable undera concept.Similarly, Gautier's emphasis
on the agreeableness dance movementsto perceptionlocates the
of
source of value in the dance in terms relevantto classic theories of
beautyof the sort that correlateto Kant'sproject, whereasnot only
Levinson'sstresson the importanceof form, but also his analysisof
the aestheticsignificanceof classicform in termsof its capabilityfor
generating systematicallyinfinitemovementvariety23 invokethe unity-
amid-variety formula for beauty that is explicit in Kant's sources,
such as FrancisHutcheson, and arguablyimplicit in Kant's theory
as well.
Applyingsomething Kant'stheoryof the aesthetic dance
like to
resultsin a formalisttheoryof the dancesomewhat akinto CliveBell's
theoryof significantform with respectto painting.Dance is a source
of value becauseof the aestheticallycompellingmovementpatterns
it affords, irrespective whetheror not those patternsare represen-
of
tationalor mimetic. In fact, mimeticconstraintson the dance or at-
temptsto makethe dancea vehiclefor ideasmighteven-and presum-
ablyin Levinson'sview actuallydid-interfere with the play of form.

9. 324 DANCE CHRONICLE
as
Historically, the nineteenth century turnedinto the twentieth
century, mimetictheoriesof art fell into increasing disrepute.For ex-
ample, as paintingturnedawayfrom the projectof representing real-
ity, perhapsas a resultof the adventof photography,it becamemore
and more apparentthat mimetictheoriesof art wereno longercom-
prehensiveenough to accommodatethe data.24Formalisttheories
dependent Kant's-such as Bell'stheoryof significant
on form-gained
attractiveness. Formalism represented, to speak, a successorto the
so
imitationtheory as the resultof momentouseventsin the art world,
wherethe significanceof imitationwas demotedwith respectto fine
art. In this context, Levinson'sattackon theatricalimitationfor the
sakeof formalmovementvaluescan be readquiteeasilyas an attempt
to bring dance aestheticsin line with what was emergingas a central
perspectiveon the natureof fine arts.
If formalismwas one responseto the declinein the prestigeof
the mimeticconceptionof art, expressionism also an alternative,
was
rivaltheory of art.2 Whereasimitationtheoriesassignedart the role
of portraying outerworldof natureand action, expression
the theor-
ies saw art as a vehiclefor clarifyingthe innerworld of feeling. This
view found philosophicalrepresentatives personssuch as Leo Tol-
in
stoy and R. G. Collingwood,26 practicalrepresentatives move-
and in
ments like Germanexpressionism moderndance-with a figure
and
like MaryWigmanservingas a bridgebetweenthe two. Martinand
Langer,of course, can be readilyinterpreted extendingthe expres-
as
siontheoryof artto dance.Theirown sharpdistinctions between dance
and theatre,construedas mimetictheatre,undoubtedlyderivefrom
theirview that expression requiresstylizationor, at least, a departure
from the straightforward of
representation reality, along with their
commitmentto the sort of medium-specificity constraintsalludedto
above.
In Rainer'scase, antitheatricalism also a functionof her en-
is
dorsementof a theoryof art developed,so to speak, elsewhere.This
wasthe theoryof modernism, whichwas advanced ClementGreen-
by
bergandMichael and
Fried,27 whichdominated American world
the art
fromthe late fortiesthroughthe sixties.It conceivedof art as a form
of critique.Specifically,the role of art was to disclosethe conditions
of possibilityof its own existence.For example,with respectto paint-
ing, JacksonPollock was thoughtto have achievedthis by contriving

10. THEATRE,DANCE AND THEORY 325
worksthat broughtto the viewer'sattentionthe fact that the essen-
tial constituentsof paintingwereline and color. Otherpainterswere
applaudedfor exemplifyingthat, in one sense, paintingsare essen-
tially flat.
This modernisttheory of art was explicitlya rival of mimetic
and expressiontheories.Mimetictheoriesof art celebrated repre-
the
sentationof the world, whereasfrom the modernistperspective, this
was illusionistic,in the pejorativesense of quot;illusion,quot; and it was the
task of modernisttheoryand practiceto unmaskthis-to revealthat,
for example, paintingswere really flat surfaces.Nor was expression
the centralvalue in art; critiquewas. JacksonPollock was not an ex-
istentialisttracinghis inner life on the canvas, as the label Abstract
Expressionist might suggest;he was more in the natureof a pheno-
menologistrevealingthe natureof all painting, in part by radically
subvertingour expectationsof paintings.
Modernismof this sort could be called a type of formalism.
But the formalismof Greenberg divergedfrom that of Bell insofaras
it was drivenby a cognitivepurpose, ratherthan by a disinterested
delight in pattern. Moreover, since that cognitive purpose was the
discoveryof essentialfeaturesof a given art form, the enterprise was
unavoidablymediumspecific. A paintingthat was theatricalshirked
the responsibilityof seriousart; by extension, so would a theatrical
dance.
Rainer'sreliance at leastcertain the tenetsof Greenbergian
on of
modernism evidentin her famousanalysisof her dance TrioA, in
are
which she discussesher quot;minimalisttendencies.quot;28 referenceto
The
minimalism here, of course, refersto the then-leading movement
art
in New York, which, though not celebrated Greenberg,
by depended
on his notions that art was a form of critiqueand that integralto that
critiquewas anti-illusionism.
Applyingthis model of critiqueto the dance, Raineridentified
movementas its essentialfeature.Character-fromthis perspective-
a
represented varietyof illusion;dancesweredesignedin such a way
as to compelthe audienceto attendto the performance movement
of
as such, eitherby meansof movements constructed defeatthe search
to
for representation, allusion,metaphor,or expressionor by meansof
everyday movements,such as walking,that werepresented as imi-
not
tations of walkingbut as literalexamplesof it. In this light, Rainer's

11. 326 DANCE CHRONICLE
antitheatricalism not, for instance, a repetitionof Mallarme'sor
is
Levinson's, rather
but in
originates an altogether differenttheoryof art.
What I hope that this second, admittedlyhurried,reviewof
the cases for and againsttheatricalism suggestsis that, pace the cyni-
cal view of the discursive historyof dance,we havenot been recycling
the same dance/theatredebate for two centuries.For example, al-
though Levinson and Rainerare antitheatrical, they are not so for
the same reasons. Rather,if this reviewof the historyof salientmo-
mentsin the history dancetheoryis compelling,
of whatseemsto emerge
as a striking regularity from our examples that our most memorable
is
perspectives the dancehave as a shared,recurring
on featurethe con-
sistentattemptto bringour thinkingabout danceinto alignmentwith
the most influential, often successivelyreigningtheories of art that
our culturehas producedsince the eighteenthcentury. How dance
theoristsline up with respectto the relationof theatreto dance de-
pendson the conceptualconstraintsof the art theorythat they bring
to the questionof the dance. We have not been havingthe samecon-
versationabout the relationof theatreand dance for two centuries;
the conversationhas changedradicallyas the discussioncame under
the influenceof successiveand often rival theoriesof art.
If this hypothesis right-that is, if our thinkingand discourse
is
about dance is intimatelybound up with reigningart theories-does
this hypothesisshed any light on the new theatricalism dance? I
in
think it does. For at present,we againfind ourselvesamida powerful
in
sea-change our waysof thinkingabout and theorizing One way art.
to locate that changeis to note brieflythe degreeto whichthe sort of
modernistprojectarticulatedby Greenberg and practicedby Rainer
in the sixtiesis currentlyunderfire. Underthat conception,the arts
werethought to have essencesthat wereto be broughtinto the fore-
groundby critique.But the most vocal art worldvoices in theoryand
in practicefor the last decade and a half have been antiessentialist,
agitatingfor artisticpluralism,for interactionamong art forms and
for mixed media. The view that art forms can be essentiallydemar-
catedhas becomesuspect;processessuchas narrative representa-
and
tion are thought to cut acrossthe boundariesof media. In this con-
text there is no reason to think that the combinationof dance and
theatreis some sort of flagranthybrid-all artis thoughtto be hybrid,
just as everytext is thought to be intertextual.

12. THEATRE, DANCE AND THEORY 327
Moreover, modernist essentialism,like Kantian formalism,
was hermetic.But neitherthe attractiveness even the plausibility
nor
of regarding in isolation from the rest of realitycommandswide-
art
spread allegiancenowadays. The conviction that art is ideally con-
tentlessor at most has as its contentart for its own sakeseemsintellec-
tually out of fashion, givingway to an alternative view that art is and
shouldbe about something.Appliedto dance, this predisposes chor-
eographers towarda willingness makeworkthat has subjects,such
to
as sexuality,gender,ethnicidentity,alienation,power, emotion, and
even politics. Moreover, this concern with content naturallysends
choreographers with renewedinterestto the resourcesof theatre-to
language,enactment,and operafor example-for the requisite means
of expression.29
Of course, one theme-perhaps as the resultof the influence
of semioticsand post-structuralism-thathas come to dominatecon-
temporarythinkingabout the arts is that of representation. Indeed,
one might say that in recent years, aestheticshas been replacedby
semiotics,conceivedof, in largemeasure,as the theoryof representa-
tion. And whereasmodernistartistswere concernedwith exploring
the essentialconditionsof art, artiststoday appearobsessedwith the
natureof representation, witnessedby the proliferationof the art
as
of allusion, spectacle, and pastiche often referredto as postmod-
in
ernism.But, again, for the choreographer participate this move-
to
ment virtuallymandatesa returnto theatreand its modes of repre-
sentation.(In some cases, this may involvewhatcan be thoughtof as
a direct use of representation, whereasrepresentations may also be
quoted by postmodernist allusionists,such as KaroleArmitage,who
reproduced sado-masochistic in
iconography her 1985 Watteau Duets
for the ostensiblyfeministpurposeof subvertingthem.)
In sum, then, the emergenceof a new theatricalism dance in
in both practiceand theory accords with our hypothesisabout the
evolvingconversation aboutthe dance.For the newtheatricalism and
the waysthat areavailable us to describe to endorseit arelinked
to and
with an emergingparadigmof our conceptionof art, one that con-
ceives of art pluralistically,that is antiessentialist,nonisolationist,
semiotic,and concernedwith representation. Thistheoreticalcontext
is not only coeval with the new theatricalism dance, but congenial
in
and conduciveto it. As in the past, our ways of talking about and

13. 328 DANCE CHRONICLE
makingthe dance have evolved in tandem with the developmentof
new ways of conceptualizing in general. So, in fact, the cynic is
art
wrong. We have not revertedto the same old tiresomeconversation.
in
The theatricality contemporary dance heraldsan entirelynew dis-
cussion.
It is worthwhile,I think, to make one last, subsidiarypoint.
A frequent,self-deprecating complaintmadeby loversof the danceis
that they are embarrassed what they feel is the intellectualback-
by
wardness the conversation
of aboutthe dance.Dance,they feel, always
lags behindthe rest of literateculture.However,if the overviewof-
feredhereis persuasive, mightbe usefulto reassessthis low opinion
it
of the place of dance in the ongoing conversationon the arts. For if
whatI have saidis correct,then to a perhapssurprising degree,dance
has been and continuesto be more or less in tandem with our best
conceptionsof art in general.The new theatricalism in this light,
is,
our latest example.
Notes
1. This paperwas originallygiven as part of quot;The TalkingBody:
A Conferenceon Theaterand Dance,quot; Rome, 1990.
2. For an accountof the Judsonmovement,see SallyBanes,Dem-
ocracy's Body: Judson Dance Theater 1962-64 (Ann Arbor:
UMI Press, 1983).
3. Yvonne Rainer, Work 1961-73 (Halifax and New York: The
Press of the Nova Scotia College of Art and Design and New
York UniversityPress, 1973), p. 51. This statementwas first
in
published Tulane DramaReview,Vol. 10, No. 2, Winter1965.
4. Ibid.
5. Rainerinserteda parentheticaldisclaimerbetweenthe two state-
mentscited here,whichreads:quot;(Thisis not to say that I person-
allydo not enjoymanyformsof theatre.It is only to definemore
stringently rulesand boundariesof my own artisticgame of
the
the moment.)quot;
6. This movementis documentedin Sally Banes, Terpsichore in
Sneakers: Post-Modern Dance(Boston:HoughtonMifflin, 1980).

14. THEATRE, DANCE AND THEORY 329
7. Where the terms quot;theatricalismquot;and quot;antitheatricalismquot; are
relativeto historicallyspecific dance worlds.
8. Jean-Georges Noverre, quot;LetterII,quot; in Dance as a Theatre Art,
editedby SelmaJeanneCohen(NewYork:Dodd, Mead& Com-
pany, 1974), p. 59.
9. Jean-Georges Noverre, quot;Letter I,quot; in Whatis Dance?, edited
by Roger Copeland and MarshallCohen (New York: Oxford
UniversityPress, 1983), p. 11.
10. TheophileGautier, The RomanticBallet as Seen by Theophile
Gautier,translated CyrilW. Beaumont(London:Beaumont,
by
1932;reprintof 1947ed. New York: Dance Horizons, n.d.), p.
17.
11. See Andre Levinson, quot;The Idea of the Dance: From Aristotle
to Mallarme,quot;in Whatis Dance?, pp. 51-4. See also, Stephane
Mallarme, quot;Ballets,quot; Whatis Dance?,pp. 111-14and Paul Val-
ery, quot;Philosophy of the Dance,quot; Whatis Dance?, pp. 55-65.
Levinsonwrote as well a brochureentitledPaul Valery,Philos-
opher of the Dance (Paris, 1927).
12. Andre Levinson, quot;The Spiritof the ClassicDance,quot; in Dance
as a Theatre Art, p. 113. I am not surethat the perhapsrhetori-
cal and, therefore,exaggerated assertions
hereaboutthe lack of
previous attentiveness the valueof puremovement the dance
to in
is perfectlyconsistentwith Levinson'scitationof Gautier,Mal-
larme,and Valeryas predecessors his quot;The Ideaof the Dance:
in
From Aristotleto Mallarme.quot;
13. See especially John Martin, The Modern Dance (New York:
Dance Horizons, 1972);SusanneK. Langer,Feelingand Form
(New York: CharlesScribners and Sons, 1953). Some may ob-
ject to my interpretation Langer a defender modern
of as of dance,
althoughI think that it is fair to place her historically way.
this
14. JacquesRiviere,quot;Le Sacredu Printemps,quot;in Whatis Dance?,
p. 119.
15. MichelFokine, quot;Letterto 'TheTimes,'July6th, 1914,quot;in What
is Dance?, p. 258.
16. Fokine, p. 260.
17. It is true, as my footnotes undoubtedlyindicate,that I derived
these examplesprimarily thinkingabout selectionsof dance
by

15. 330 DANCE CHRONICLE
history, theory, and criticismthat are most frequentlyantho-
logizedin popularreaders.For some, this may seemto beprima
facie evidencethat my sense of dance historyis tendentious.I,
on the other hand, think that these anthologies,and the reap-
pearanceof certainarticles,authors,and viewsin them, offer us
the best picture of dance's conception of itself at the present
time. After all, it is through such selectionsthat risinggenera-
are
tions of dancers,critics,and seriousappreciators introduced
to the lore of the field. Although such selectionsmay ultimate-
ly-in accordance withas yet unforeseen of
standards accuracy-
become historicallysuspect,they are at presentfundamental to
our appreciation/conception the
of dance.Thus, I do not believe
that relianceon them is tendentious.Rather,they are the ideal
place to look when speculatingabout how we think about the
dance. In a certainsense, there is no other place to look for a
sense about how quot;wequot; conceivethe dance.
18. CharlesBatteaux,Les Beaux arts reduits a un memeprincipe
(Paris: Saillartet Nyon, et veuve Desaire, 1773).
19. On the relationof Batteauxand Noverre,see FrancisSparshott,
Off the Ground:First Steps to a PhilosophicalConsideration
of the Dance (Princeton:PrincetonUniversityPress, 1988),pp.
145-52.
20. ImmanuelKant, The Critiqueof Judgement,translated J.C. by
Meredith(Oxford:ClarendonPress, 1952).
21. See Clive Bell, Art (London: Chatto and Windus, 1914). For
analysisof this type of theory, see Noel Carroll, quot;Clive Bell's
Aesthetic Hypothesis,quot; in Aesthetics, edited by G. Dickie, R.
Sclafani,and R. Roblin.2nd ed. (NewYork:St. Martin'sPress,
1989).For a diagnosisof the influenceof this sort of theorizing,
see Noel Carroll, quot;Beautyand the Genealogyof Art Theory,quot;
PhilosophicalForum (forthcoming).
22. Valery, quot;The Philosophyof Dance.quot;
23. Levinson, quot;The Spiritof the ClassicDance,quot; p. 115.
24. See, for example,ArthurDanto, quot;TheEnd of Art,quot; in ThePhil-
osophicalDisenfranchisement Art (NewYork:Columbia
of Uni-
versityPress, 1987).
25. Ibid.

16. THEATRE, DANCE AND THEORY 331
26. For a thoroughaccountof expression theories,see FrancisSpar-
shott, The Theoryof the Arts (Princeton:PrincetonUniversity
Press, 1982), chaptersXI and XII.
27. See ClementGreenberg, and Culture
Art (Boston:BeaconPress,
1971), and MichaelFried, ThreeAmericanPainters(New York:
Garland, 1978).
28. See YvonneRainer,quot;A QuasiSurveyof Some 'Minimalist' Ten-
denciesin the QuantitativelyMinimalDance ActivityMidstthe
Plethora,or an Analysisof Trio A,quot; in MinimalArt: A Critical
Anthology, edited by GregoryBattcock (New York: Praeger,
1968).
29. From the opposite direction,dramatists and directorsare inter-
ested in the deploymentof dance movement for undercutting
the impressionof naturalism.