Choreography as Research: Iteration, Object, Context

Research output: Chapter in Book/Report/Conference proceedingChapter

Abstract

There is great interest these days in applying scientific research methods to dance and other embodied practices (for example, see Schmalzl and Kerr 2016). That is hardly surprising, given how important the discoveries of technological science are to the world we live in. In this essay, I explore a different pathway. How does science work? Through what processes do the sciences generate new knowledge? Arguably, if we want to understand how science works, scientists are not the people to ask. Scientists can tell us how molecules and particles and chemicals work, but who can tell us how scientists work? I have argued (Spatz 2015) that social analyses of science — the field of social epistemology — have as much to offer our understanding of embodied practice as science does. When technoscience looks at embodied practices like dance, it follows its usual approach of reduction and division: It sees bodies and body parts, heart rates and brainwave patterns, muscles and tendons, statistics and other quantitative measures. This is very different from what social epistemology sees when it looks at embodied practice. Social epistemology (Schatzki et al. 2001) studies how practice is structured by knowledge. When it looks at dances and dancers, it sees styles and schools, practices and techniques, social processes of transmission and innovation, invented traditions and traditions of invention. Above all, social epistemology sees dances and dancers as epistemic, as knowable but never fully known, constantly unfolding. Rather than trying to pin down a dance, social epistemology treats it as a field of knowledge that increases rather than decreases in complexity the more we study it. A social epistemology of dance would examine the objects that interest dancers rather than those that interest scientists. It would do so in a way that brings a particular kind of rigor to those objects, accounting for both their corporeality — what social epistemology calls realism — and their social construction. In this chapter, I begin to develop such an account.
LanguageEnglish
Title of host publicationContemporary choreography:
Subtitle of host publicationA critical reader
EditorsJo Butterworth, Liesbeth Wildschut
PublisherRoutledge
Chapter1.5
Edition2nd
ISBN (Print)9781138679979 , 9781138679986
Publication statusPublished - 13 Dec 2017

Fingerprint

epistemology
dance
science
corporeality
social process
social construction
invention
realism
research method
statistics
innovation
school
knowledge

Cite this

Spatz, B. (2017). Choreography as Research: Iteration, Object, Context. In J. Butterworth, & L. Wildschut (Eds.), Contemporary choreography: A critical reader (2nd ed.). Routledge.
Spatz, Ben. / Choreography as Research : Iteration, Object, Context. Contemporary choreography: A critical reader. editor / Jo Butterworth ; Liesbeth Wildschut. 2nd. ed. Routledge, 2017.
@inbook{95f3e6476f764e0b871595a5a42dae99,
title = "Choreography as Research: Iteration, Object, Context",
abstract = "There is great interest these days in applying scientific research methods to dance and other embodied practices (for example, see Schmalzl and Kerr 2016). That is hardly surprising, given how important the discoveries of technological science are to the world we live in. In this essay, I explore a different pathway. How does science work? Through what processes do the sciences generate new knowledge? Arguably, if we want to understand how science works, scientists are not the people to ask. Scientists can tell us how molecules and particles and chemicals work, but who can tell us how scientists work? I have argued (Spatz 2015) that social analyses of science — the field of social epistemology — have as much to offer our understanding of embodied practice as science does. When technoscience looks at embodied practices like dance, it follows its usual approach of reduction and division: It sees bodies and body parts, heart rates and brainwave patterns, muscles and tendons, statistics and other quantitative measures. This is very different from what social epistemology sees when it looks at embodied practice. Social epistemology (Schatzki et al. 2001) studies how practice is structured by knowledge. When it looks at dances and dancers, it sees styles and schools, practices and techniques, social processes of transmission and innovation, invented traditions and traditions of invention. Above all, social epistemology sees dances and dancers as epistemic, as knowable but never fully known, constantly unfolding. Rather than trying to pin down a dance, social epistemology treats it as a field of knowledge that increases rather than decreases in complexity the more we study it. A social epistemology of dance would examine the objects that interest dancers rather than those that interest scientists. It would do so in a way that brings a particular kind of rigor to those objects, accounting for both their corporeality — what social epistemology calls realism — and their social construction. In this chapter, I begin to develop such an account.",
keywords = "Embodiment, Choreography, Dance, Social epistemology, Practice as research",
author = "Ben Spatz",
year = "2017",
month = "12",
day = "13",
language = "English",
isbn = "9781138679979",
editor = "Jo Butterworth and Liesbeth Wildschut",
booktitle = "Contemporary choreography:",
publisher = "Routledge",
address = "United Kingdom",
edition = "2nd",

}

Spatz, B 2017, Choreography as Research: Iteration, Object, Context. in J Butterworth & L Wildschut (eds), Contemporary choreography: A critical reader. 2nd edn, Routledge.

Choreography as Research : Iteration, Object, Context. / Spatz, Ben.

Contemporary choreography: A critical reader. ed. / Jo Butterworth; Liesbeth Wildschut. 2nd. ed. Routledge, 2017.

Research output: Chapter in Book/Report/Conference proceedingChapter

TY - CHAP

T1 - Choreography as Research

T2 - Iteration, Object, Context

AU - Spatz, Ben

PY - 2017/12/13

Y1 - 2017/12/13

N2 - There is great interest these days in applying scientific research methods to dance and other embodied practices (for example, see Schmalzl and Kerr 2016). That is hardly surprising, given how important the discoveries of technological science are to the world we live in. In this essay, I explore a different pathway. How does science work? Through what processes do the sciences generate new knowledge? Arguably, if we want to understand how science works, scientists are not the people to ask. Scientists can tell us how molecules and particles and chemicals work, but who can tell us how scientists work? I have argued (Spatz 2015) that social analyses of science — the field of social epistemology — have as much to offer our understanding of embodied practice as science does. When technoscience looks at embodied practices like dance, it follows its usual approach of reduction and division: It sees bodies and body parts, heart rates and brainwave patterns, muscles and tendons, statistics and other quantitative measures. This is very different from what social epistemology sees when it looks at embodied practice. Social epistemology (Schatzki et al. 2001) studies how practice is structured by knowledge. When it looks at dances and dancers, it sees styles and schools, practices and techniques, social processes of transmission and innovation, invented traditions and traditions of invention. Above all, social epistemology sees dances and dancers as epistemic, as knowable but never fully known, constantly unfolding. Rather than trying to pin down a dance, social epistemology treats it as a field of knowledge that increases rather than decreases in complexity the more we study it. A social epistemology of dance would examine the objects that interest dancers rather than those that interest scientists. It would do so in a way that brings a particular kind of rigor to those objects, accounting for both their corporeality — what social epistemology calls realism — and their social construction. In this chapter, I begin to develop such an account.

AB - There is great interest these days in applying scientific research methods to dance and other embodied practices (for example, see Schmalzl and Kerr 2016). That is hardly surprising, given how important the discoveries of technological science are to the world we live in. In this essay, I explore a different pathway. How does science work? Through what processes do the sciences generate new knowledge? Arguably, if we want to understand how science works, scientists are not the people to ask. Scientists can tell us how molecules and particles and chemicals work, but who can tell us how scientists work? I have argued (Spatz 2015) that social analyses of science — the field of social epistemology — have as much to offer our understanding of embodied practice as science does. When technoscience looks at embodied practices like dance, it follows its usual approach of reduction and division: It sees bodies and body parts, heart rates and brainwave patterns, muscles and tendons, statistics and other quantitative measures. This is very different from what social epistemology sees when it looks at embodied practice. Social epistemology (Schatzki et al. 2001) studies how practice is structured by knowledge. When it looks at dances and dancers, it sees styles and schools, practices and techniques, social processes of transmission and innovation, invented traditions and traditions of invention. Above all, social epistemology sees dances and dancers as epistemic, as knowable but never fully known, constantly unfolding. Rather than trying to pin down a dance, social epistemology treats it as a field of knowledge that increases rather than decreases in complexity the more we study it. A social epistemology of dance would examine the objects that interest dancers rather than those that interest scientists. It would do so in a way that brings a particular kind of rigor to those objects, accounting for both their corporeality — what social epistemology calls realism — and their social construction. In this chapter, I begin to develop such an account.

KW - Embodiment

KW - Choreography

KW - Dance

KW - Social epistemology

KW - Practice as research

UR - https://www.routledge.com/Contemporary-Choreography-A-Critical-Reader-2nd-Edition/Butterworth-Wildschut/p/book/9781138679986

M3 - Chapter

SN - 9781138679979

SN - 9781138679986

BT - Contemporary choreography:

A2 - Butterworth, Jo

A2 - Wildschut, Liesbeth

PB - Routledge

ER -

Spatz B. Choreography as Research: Iteration, Object, Context. In Butterworth J, Wildschut L, editors, Contemporary choreography: A critical reader. 2nd ed. Routledge. 2017