modern dance, was inclined to view movements as subject to music. Martin asserts that in order to be accepted as an art form in its own right, dance should be aligned with movements that represent individual and universal concerns through choreography as a unique process of dance (Martin, 1933, p.6). Since the 1960s, on the other hand, the meaning of choreography has not been confined to inscribing movements into the bodies, but it has extended to setting a structure which instigates the bodies to move, in response to the designed environment. Emerging at the Reuben Gallery and the Judson Church in New York, postmodern dance as the antithesis of stylised and expressive movements of modern dance tended to claim distinct artistic initiatives to modify a compositional procedure and to extend beyond a theatre space as the site for performance. The postmodern choreographers in the 1960s and 1970s had individual aesthetic concerns and methods, but shared common ground regarding what choreography means in their works. They intended to abandon movements that represent someone or something else and instead present the body itself as a message. Their choreographic focus is on investigating how and why movements proceed, rather than what the movements display. These movements, then, are not required to be in harmony with music or to be conducted in a stylised manner with technical virtuosity. Instead, the choreographers devise how pedestrian movements and everyday gestures are arranged and combined by using task-oriented and improvisational processes which give rise to physical and socio-political awareness. As an iconoclast, Anna Halprin’s concept of directing rather than choreographing had significant influence on the early generation of postmodern choreographers, such as Simone Forti, Yvonne Rainer, Trisha Brown and Steve Paxton. For Halprin, improvisation is the key method to emancipate the body from institutionalised
modern dance, was inclined to view movements as subject to music. Martin asserts that in order to be accepted as an art form in its own right, dance should be aligned with movements that represent individual and universal concerns through choreography as a unique process of dance (Martin, 1933, p.6). Since the 1960s, on the other hand, the meaning of choreography has not been confined to inscribing movements into the bodies, but it has extended to setting a structure which instigates the bodies to move, in response to the designed environment. Emerging at the Reuben Gallery and the Judson Church in New York, postmodern dance as the antithesis of stylised and expressive movements of modern dance tended to claim distinct artistic initiatives to modify a compositional procedure and to extend beyond a theatre space as the site for performance. The postmodern choreographers in the 1960s and 1970s had individual aesthetic concerns and methods, but shared common ground regarding what choreography means in their works. They intended to abandon movements that represent someone or something else and instead present the body itself as a message. Their choreographic focus is on investigating how and why movements proceed, rather than what the movements display. These movements, then, are not required to be in harmony with music or to be conducted in a stylised manner with technical virtuosity. Instead, the choreographers devise how pedestrian movements and everyday gestures are arranged and combined by using task-oriented and improvisational processes which give rise to physical and socio-political awareness. As an iconoclast, Anna Halprin’s concept of directing rather than choreographing had significant influence on the early generation of postmodern choreographers, such as Simone Forti, Yvonne Rainer, Trisha Brown and Steve Paxton. For Halprin, improvisation is the key method to emancipate the body from institutionalised
Seok_Jin_Han_Choreographing_the_Posthuman.docx