«Barre is for the dancer what is lathe for the worker»
Galina Ulanova
Almost a year ago I completed a research on the dance performances of the Athens Festival during the Cold War (1955-1967) an unexplored area of the Greek dance history. As the Cold War and its cultural aspects are part of the global history often examined from the perspective of powerful -even hegemonic- cultural centres, the contribution of an approach coming from the margins could mean an interesting counterbalance to the topic, as the other side of the coin. In addition, the case of Athens Festival as a national cultural institution and Greece as a special player (a Western country within a Communist Balkan Peninsula) adds interesting shades to the topic.
A latent aspect of the research was the construction of ideas about dance artists, their works and labour through the lenses of the Cold War. Especially, what were the differences between Eastern and Western conceptualisations of dance artists in the eyes of the Greek audience, and how these can impinge current discourses on artists’ labour (Kunst, 2015; Parkinson, 2014; Tomic-Vajagic, 2014).
From the archival research and Greek press clippings of the period, there are some interesting points to highlight, which I will limit to construction of American and Russian ballet dancers, as follows:
Soviet dancers, especially female ballet dancers are presented as workers, that is, as citizens within a society with ideological and financial imperatives. On the other hand, in the case of Western artists their artistic identity erases their social or historical contexts. As a consequence, an idea of autonomy of the arts is foregrounded in the latter, in contrast to a highly political-social dimension in the first case. What kind of resonances or background preconceptions can such ideas bring into today’s debates on art’s autonomy? Is there a fear of dealing with artists as working citizens or even artisans? What is the main issue at stake?
In the case of Russian artists, payment for their labour is a matter of analysis. Dancers’ high compensation is presented as a factor contributing to ballet’s high value in Communist countries and a great motivation for many youngsters to pursue such a career. Therefore, being a ballet dancer in such contexts is an occupation. On the other hand, the work of American dancers is implicated in their effort to master their technique, their work is to discipline their bodies. Their bodies are perceived as their field of working not as living bodies or subjects, but as tools in the hands of their possessors to do their job. In our current world of immaterial labour and globalised society of knowledge and information, how such details on labour from a highly political historical perspective can affect our criticality, both practices and concepts?
Paradoxically enough, on stage in both cases, dancing bodies are perceived as «semiotic bodies» (Fisher-Lichte, 2008), as bodies who perform their role, or who are trying to capture the true essence of their heroes ignoring the real person on stage. Contemporary dance practices have questioned, subverted, critiqued and commented on such issues on stage through new dramaturgies and choreographic approaches. However, even today where the split between role and person is meticulously weaved within the fabric of the work, how much “truth” can we handle? Is the use of reality and true bodies (being the dancers’ or the audience’s) a mode of playing down critical thinking through overwhelming empathy or the joy of participation?
Regarding the kind of knowledge dance offered in each case, American companies are examples of a variety of dance styles, dance techniques, and not only ballet. Hence their dancers are seen as experts of a knowledge which is produced in current times having a broad spectrum of characteristics. Soviet dancers, on the other hand, are linked to a knowledge inherited to them by tradition; a tradition coming in Tsarist Russia from abroad and inherited to the Soviet State. Therefore this knowledge is extremely important and valuable but it belongs to another system of production. The Soviet dancers are not the creators of this expertise; they are just its bearer. How then can this point help us re-articulate our current assumptions about our dance practices and the blurring between practice and production?
Last, but not least: American and Soviet dancers are highly praised for their artistic qualities and competences. Greek dancers of the times seem to lack both the mastering of technique and the knowledge compared to both superpowers. This might be true in a sense. But on the other it reveals a hierarchical way of thinking and perceiving, a neo-colonial and auto-colonial gaze that does not allow alternative bodies and knowledge to suffice. It is the construction of the canon par excellence. There is consensus nowadays when looking at this remote era to discern the problems and the forces at play. But what about our times? How our current critical analysis of dance practices and our overt “politically correct”, extremely open and inclusive approach to dance hints the construction of a new canon?
How do our perspectives on the past inform our understanding of the present putting a question mark to our very hidden mechanisms of conformity?
Bibliography
Fischer-Lichte, Erika (2008) The Transformative Power of Performance. London & New York: Routledge
Kunst, Bojana (2015) Artist at Work: Proximity of Art and Capitalism, John Hunt Publishing
Parkinson, Chrysa ed. (2014) «The Dancer as Agent Collection», SARMA, available at http://sarma.be/pages/The_Dancer_as_Agent_Collection
Tomic-Vajagic, Tamara (2014) «The dancer at work: The aesthetic and politics of practice clothes and leotard costumes in ballet performance», Scene: Critical Costume, Vol.2, no 1-2, pp. 89- 105
Tsintziloni, S. «Χορός, Φεστιβάλ Αθηνών και Πολιτιστικός Ψυχρός Πόλεμος» [Dance, Athens Festival & Cultural Cold War], Sychnrona Themata, τεύχος 145-146, σ. 34-44
Tsintziloni, S. & Prickett, S. (2016) «Dancing National Ideologies: The Athens Festival in the Cold War», Proceedings of the International Conference Cut & Paste: Dance Advocacy in the Age of Austerity, Society of Dance History Scholars (SDHS) & Congress on Research in Dance (CORD). Cambridge University Press, 306-314 ISSN: 2049-1255