In the months surrounding Jennifer Homans’ new account of the history of Ballet, there was an effectual freak-out from dance writers and bloggers about the impending death of ballet as Homans claimed quite boldly that “ballet has come to resemble a dying language…understood and appreciated by a shrinking circle of old believers in a closed corner of culture.”
Whether or not you agree with Ms. Homans, her bold proclamation stirred up the dance community and forced us to take a good look at the state of ballet regionally, in the US, and beyond.
Perhaps it was for the same shock-value that the most recent Dance/USA conference presented the dramatically titled break-out session Dance: A Field in Danger. Nichelle and I sat in it together, and speaker Kadida V. Doumbia (after a somewhat incomprehensible intro) simply posed the question, “Why are there no jobs?” and let the group take it from there. Tensions ran high as we struggled to define what a successful job in dance looks like. Some claimed that the lack of jobs is due to a diversity problem, with predominantly white, upper/middle class individuals capitalizing the market. Others questioned the definition of “diversity” in dance, and cited job scarcity as an overall problem in that there are not enough resources to go around.
A young woman started to cry as she described her personal struggles with a career in dance, and the difficulty of working multiple jobs in the service industry without access to adequate health care or insurance.
The truth is, this young woman’s story is more common than the glamorous dance careers presented by the media and dance teachers. Are we doing enough to prep college students and young emerging dancers for the day-to-day struggle of a career in dance? Are we lacking creativity in defining what a job in dance looks like? Why would anyone actually want to enter this profession?
Finding the “why”
An over-arching theme of the conference was the need for all of us to “find the why” in what we do. The status quo can be a really comfortable place to be, even when we spend entire conferences discussing why change is imminent and essential. It’s easy to stay in our day-to-day bubbles and stop considering the greater dance community in what we do…. that’s why finding our “why” is so critical.
I found that an unfortunate trend of this session in particular*, and perhaps of the conference in general, was to bring up a problem, complain, and not have time left to pitch positive solutions. As the predominant national service organization for professional dance companies and, to a lesser extent, individual dancers, the somewhat suppressed efforts of Dance/USA to lead are not for lack of trying… they struggle with the same poor funding and infrastructure that plague the dance organizations they seek to support. Dance/USA appears to be in the business of retweeting, when it wants to be leading the charge. In a conversation with Brandon Gryde, Director of Government Affairs, he openly acknowledged the backlog of communication and the steps that need to happen in order to truly be the face of advocacy for dance in this country. How does he hope to accomplish this?
Maybe the question isn’t how, but why?
Big budget dance studios teeming with three year olds and pre-professional hopefuls are turning out dancers at a remarkable rate and the non-profit sector of dance companies are struggling to keep heads above water. As funding flounders at the professional level, it behooves us to take a look at our “whys” and reassess the way dance is created, funded, supported and presented. Dances are often created in a spirit of collaboration. We as an entire dance community can embrace that collective spirit to work together and forge a sustainable future. Within the context of this 75 minute roundtable, we failed to solve all of the problems we face – or to really pin down whether or not dance is, in fact, a field in danger – but as one participant said, “We are constantly creating from nothing…it’s what we do best. Apply it to life!”
Blogging as a forum to grow our audience and continue the discussion
In the end, as my colleague Zac Whittenburg said, “it’s all about the dialogue”. We create dances as a means to communicate that which cannot be expressed in words… and either because of or in spite of this it’s a medium that isn’t always accessible to the outside world. Homans’ supposition that dance is “understood and appreciated by a shrinking circle of old believers in a closed corner of culture” might not be specific to ballet. What we do is not inherently understood, which might be why I see so many familiar faces at every dance concert I attend.
To paraphrase Nichelle (paraphrasing Simon Sinek), the “why” is something that is innate and beyond the realm of verbal communication. It’s not WHAT we do, but WHY that truly reaches people. So long as we create authentically from our “why”, we have the ability to touch people at their very core. That is an awesome and uncomfortable place to be as an artist AND an audience member.
The question remains: how can the concept of “WHY” help us transcend the culture barrier that has us facing a serious cash flow problem.
In order to sustain ourselves, we have to find another way to reach audiences and increase the value that society places on dance. Words are a form of communication that is often more easily understood. Not to brag, but platforms like Dance Advantage are a great medium for accessing a larger community of people who might not ordinarily chose dance. The ability to articulate your work in words cannot be underestimated. By the same token, we can continue to address problems among ourselves that can’t possibly be solved in a four day conference comprised of a small percentage of the dance community. Being comfortable with words, I personally feel some level of accountability for continuing this work, but it requires that we all converse together.
So, what do you think?
Is dance on the verge of failure?
How do we create and/or reinterpret successful and sustainable jobs in dance-related professions that make dance a viable career choice?
Does the way dance is portrayed by the media help or hinder dance as an artform?
*Read a bit of the discourse from Dance: A Field in Danger by checking out the live tweets (mostly mine) at #fieldindanger
Lauren Warnecke is a freelance writer and editor, focused on dance and cultural criticism in Chicago and across the Midwest. Lauren is the dance critic for the Chicago Tribune, editor of See Chicago Dance, and founder/editor of Art Intercepts, with bylines in Chicago Magazine, Milwaukee Magazine, St. Louis Magazine and Dance Media publications, among others. Holding degrees in dance and kinesiology, Lauren is an instructor of dance and exercise science at Loyola University Chicago. Read Lauren’s posts.
First off- so well written! It’s hard to just ‘put it out there,’ but you did and did it well.
I felt Dance USA was a great STARTING point, a jumping off platform to inspire people in the dance world to make change. Yes, there could have been more dialogue, but in a world of “What about me?” and “It’s not my fault” I thought Dance USA (whether or not they realized it) gave people an opportunity and desire to push themselves to make change. And if people didn’t get that impulse, then they need to stop playing the victim and do something about it. Oh man… will I get backlash for that comment? Probably.
Change is needed, in every art form, but especially dance. It doesn’t start big, it starts with small and simple things. Okay, I really need to get my butt on a plane to Chicago so we can talk about this in depth.
Thanks! #blushing. Whether or not you get slack, it’s true, isn’t it? That’s why there are fourteen million dance studios and companies… dancers take the work into their own hands. But that, in a way, is also part of the problem. One of the reasons dance is not sustainable is because we aren’t working together. We’re infighting for a limited number of resources. Ms.
Doumbia sent a follow-up email that mentioned again that companies that are ethnically diverse “cannot access any kind of funding because of their dance styles [and] their racial background.” I don’t see ANYONE having access to enough funding if we don’t work together.
What’s that saying? Many hands make light work??? or The longest of journeys starts with a single step??? Either way, this is my attempt to take the first step, to put my hand in and at least start an open and honest conversation about the fact that we have a lot of work to do not to survive, but to THRIVE! (I got that last bit from Nichelle, btw).
…and, I’ve got a couch for you to sleep on when you get here…
Great article Lauren, thank you for keeping the conversation going. Tiffany, I agree, we do have to drop the victim, struggling artist identity – that is if we indeed want to thrive.
I think it is important to specify the ways in which we can “work together”. Perhaps more choreographers need to have an active role in shaping public understanding and appreciation for the art of dance. It’s but for our vision that companies are formed and the need for dancers (in the making of art, for concert stage, film) exists. Yet, I hear little from or about working choreographers in mainstream media (unless they are banging a popular film star).
IMHO, current dance tv shows bring dance in front of a broad audience but do little to nil to promote the art of dance and in some cases those shows are contributing to the misunderstanding of dance as art.
I’ll add more to this topic…..can I come to Chicago too? 🙂
Thanks Renee, for jumping in! Nichelle did a few posts on “contemporary” dance and I agree that promoting glorified lyrical dance performed to pop music and touting it as high art can be misleading….. not because that stuff doesn’t carry value, entertainment, and a level of artistry, but because it ostracizes people against more experimental artists. I remember Wade Robson creating some stuff for SYTYCD a few years back that was a little more abstract and edgy, and then watching it be bashed by the judges simply because they admittedly didn’t understand it. Am I right in saying that he really isn’t on that show anymore??
So, what IS to be done? How do we promote understanding and advocate for dance as a whole? and Renee, come to the Chi any time!
When I first starting teaching, I felt like an artist sharing tools of the trade. Now I feel like a teacher that offers insight into the arts. It is a very different identity. It makes me also think about the articles from Dance/USA again…the professional artists taking tenure track jobs in in higher ed in order to keep creating. As educators, we all have very different approaches, experiences, identities, and impact. As artists, the statement is just as true.
The conversation about sustainability somehow keeps trailing off when we get to the inclusion of non-artists and their development/progress to support that of the artists. Without the dialogue, we just end up begging for money and for pity.
(Did you read the article about why Villella was canned…..board members resent always being asked for emergency money.) We need to nurture the pool of people willing to pay…we can’t do that without positive exposure and a meaningful explanation of why this matters.
And too often these days I am left wondering myself- why, beyond the benefits of education, does dance matter?
Society isn’t the same as it once was, with the majority of people working on assembling lines and answering to “the man”. Now there are plenty of freedoms, even if only perceived, and people aren’t looking for voices/artists to channel their own stories. Everyone can blog, create, write, dance,….. everyone wants to be special and thinks they are. We don’t need people to blaze trails the way we once did. We once needed the likes of Duncan, Graham, Ailey, Cunningham and Balanchine to push boundaries, and speak for us. Their work took us out of ourselves.
Now, I feel the most impactful work is that of Bill T. Jones and those that are taking us back into ourselves. Still/Here, the Lincoln piece, – the stories of who we are, how we can channel our potential, and how we view our histories in a new light. Synthesizing the information, reimagining the stories, reteaching us to find the meaning we think we are already spewing.
The content is not self-involved, while the process still can be. (The artists ego is still satisfied but the purpose of the piece is broader than the individual/ensemble). It isn’t a dance for the sake of making a dance, for the opportunity to self-explore. These are works that connect us as people, that interest and involve people outside of dance enthusiasts in meaningful ways. It also allows non-dancers/funders to have an opinion and cause a reaction because they have some type of connection to the ideas even if they have no significant understanding of dance as a central language.
In that light, I almost feel hopeful that there is a direction for a future in dance/arts. If Graham was taking the meaning and leading the expression to be shared and appreciated by the common person, serving as a voice for the people when expression was not commonplace- Perhaps current artists are the reciprocal of that. We all have a voice now but not much of value to say. We need direction and we need editing. Perhaps artists are the keepers of that process. The sifters. The miners. I hope there is some kind of real articulation further down the road.
Are you regularly speaking to your colleagues in the orchestra world these days? Substitute ‘dancer’ for ‘orchestra musician’ and you’re having the same conversation. There is a chasm between the teaching and thinking in music schools today and the realities of getting and keeping an orchestra job. I don’t know what the answers are but surely schools haven’t prepared themselves to examine what the massive cultural shift in the orchestra industry means to them either.
“In order to sustain ourselves, we have to find another way to reach audiences and increase the value that society places on dance.†Other ways of reaching audiences are constantly being tried (site specific performances, flash mobs, outreach into and for schools…etc) and abandoned in frustration for the very reason they were created. It seems that no matter how easily accessible, inexpensive or immediate one presents dance art, the American public refuses to acknowledge its relevance or value. More importantly, big donors and arts patrons who control the Board of Directors of non-profit arts organizations often view their “product†through a self-serving, revenue generating, run-it-like-a-business paradigm to disastrous results (re: Miami City Ballet, Philadelphia Orchestra, New York City Opera, Ballet San Jose,…etc). As ABT Artistic Director Kevin McKenzie recently observed, “…Every good artistic decision is a lousy business decision. And vice versa.â€
On the one hand you say, “Words are a form of communication that is often more easily understood…The ability to articulate your work in words cannot be underestimated.†While on the other hand you rightly observe, “We create dances as a means to communicate that which cannot be expressed in words… and either because of or in spite of this it’s a medium that isn’t always accessible to the outside world.†It is most often the case that the best salesmen are not very good creative artists. For one thing, sales require an extroverted personality, while art is generally wrought through individual, often isolated, struggle. (We certainly do not demand our star athletes to be articulate, let alone particularly educated, only that they perform well on a consistent level. And think of all the many arts organizations that could simultaneously thrive on the salary of just ONE of those sportsmen!)
I really relate to Brittany Breyer’s recent retort in The Dance Enthusiast, “Many of us have been brought up with the idea that our field is beyond a job – to be an artist is almost a sacred calling. If you have ever danced you will understand. We love our art form and have the conviction that it does others good. With integrity and passion we put our bodies- our very selves- on the line to create. Our work is beyond a job description; in many ways it is a life’s practice or a life’s mission. How does one monetize that?†Or verbally express such an experience? Sadly, one cannot eat or raise a family on ideals alone.