My major was interpretation, where I learned American Sign Language (ASL) and the task of interpreting between it and English. I took Spanish classes, I took German classes, I took linguistics classes, I took anthropology classes, I took writing classes, and I took speech communication classes. In my graduate program I have taken rhetoric and writing classes, philosophy classes, and applied communication studies classes. I have studied many ways through which we communicate with movement. Turns out, there is somewhere I forgot to look.
ASL is a visual gestural language, the entire premise is movement: of the fingers, hands, arms, face, body, and the manipulation of space. In my Spanish and German language courses, I learned cultural norms for space and gesture. In linguistics, I examined the difference in the use of space and movement in dialects of ASL. In anthropology, I learned about how we construct the cultural norms for gesture, space, and body language, and how to recognize and adapt to these norms in other cultures. The list goes on. I have studied how to control my body language for various effects, I have studied Ciceronian texts on how to employ gesture and oratory in persuasive acts, I have learned about physical presence and the impact of environmental spatial elements on communicative acts. I say all of this to emphasize one point: I know a fair amount about movement and space as it relates to communication.
This summer I was invited by a friend, Sydney Ippolito, to collaborate on the Artists in Resonance (AIR) Project. Sydney had the idea for a piece that she wanted to choreograph and include ASL in the dance. Throughout this project I learned about communication through a different manner of movement: dance.
There are a number of themes that resonate through my previous studies and my new experience with dance: the speed of movement, the size, repetition, placement in space, correlation with other movements, and so on. But there was something new, something unique to dance that I hadn't encountered in other studies: it is lyrical.
Historically, up to this summer, I had studied movement in very clinical settings through a highly analytical lens; however, this project pushed me to explore movement as lyrical act. I was now faced with the task of employing movement not only to communicate an idea, but to express.
Before I delve much further, I should give more information about the piece. "Communicative Renderings" is a dance piece that tells a story and explores the relationships between power, interaction, and meaning as they pertain to art. The general idea is that we have a central figure who is unsure about her own meaning for art. What is it? What does it do? Our central figure, well, she is torn. She has three different concepts of art (each represented by a pair of dancers) that all exist within her and create tension. The first is that art is not constructive; that it cannot mean the same thing for different people and that such an impossibility is a problem (specifically, that art serves others vs. that art serves one's self). The second is that art is a manipulative act; that we are forced to accept another's meaning for something that we perceive very differently. The third is that art can be shared; that it can be mutually appreciated by others with different perspectives; art, and the experience of it, is not and end or a goal, but a process-a journey. Note that each of these concepts is a progression of the previous concept (art is not mutual, art should not be mutual, art is mutual).
The movements and signs that I offered had to uphold the larger ideas of the piece. There were mother-phrases of movement that each segment incorporated and adapted to enhance each segment, both in content and in form. The sign language had to do the same; this was the challenge.
For the first couple, the interaction need to be conflicting, peacefully conflicting. They needed, not to act violently against one another, only to block one another. So, we had them speak over each other, we had them walk into one another, in front of one another. While one was moving on a high plane, one was moving on a low plane. And, we had them sign things that were, conceptually, in direct opposition of one another. They signed in turn, and at the same time. The only thing that they signed, or did at all, in unison, was to sign COMMUNICATE-BREAK. The only thing that this pair could construct was their impotent relationship.
The second couple, the manipulative segment, required themes that were oppressive, controlling and movement that was harsh, violent, even a bit uncomfortable to watch, perhaps. Our manipulator was abrasive, she grabbed and touched her partner without any sign of permission to do so. She physically moved her partner to show her power. We had the victim sign things like REVOLT, only to have the movement stunted and reverted by her manipulator's OPPRESS. The vicim's FREEDOM was arrested by the manipulator and forced in to a BLOCK (concept of being thwarted). They interacted intimately, the manipulator controlling the production of signs on the victim's body. We could think of no stronger representation of this relationship dynamic than by violating the physical space of the victim with the ideology of the manipulator.
The last couple, the constructive couple, required movements that went well together, that complimented both the movement and theme of the other dancer. We had them perform the same movements as mirrors of the other, we had them perform them exactly the same movements, and we had their signs connect together. In the same way that we used signing on the other person's body to violate with the previous couple, by way of inviting the signs with the second half of each sign (some signs require two hands to produce), we used the same tactic to share space, to show cohesion.
Finally, our central figure, having empowered (via sign) and disempowered (via sign) each construct, arrives at a meaning that she endorses for art. She blends elements of all three constructs together in speech and in movement. She is all of the couples. She is none of the couples.
If you zoom far enough out of the boundaries of each discipline, dance and interpreting share a fair amount in common. The largest thematic congruence is that we both deal with meaning in motion. Both require a heightened sense of precision. Both require a heightened awareness of one's body: of what it looks like, of what it is doing, of how to control it. Both require an understanding of how an audience will experience the product.
My graduate studies are in UALR's MA: Interdisciplinary Studies program. I could not have asked for a better project than AIR to give me a space to blend my love of communication, my fascination with movement, and my penchant for interdisciplinary endeavors. The collaboration in this project was phenomenal. Sydney, myself, and all of our fantastic dancers created the language for the spoken pieces, we used excerpts from that to determine the tone for the signs that we incorporated. Sydney and I plotted out movements together. And in concert with all of this collaborative work we still respected each other's expertise: I was left to deal with the signs; Sydney with the choreography; and our dancers with execution and improvisation.
I come away from this project with a deeper understanding of movement as a vehicle for communication, and with a much deeper respect for dance. I challenge you to attend a dance performance, and not only appreciate its beauty, but also consider the precision of the movement and appreciate the amount of thought, planning, and creativity that fostered the performance before you. I offer the same challenge the next time that you watch an interpreter work, or are working with one yourself.
I could go on about how working with the costume and lighting designers, and all of the crew for that matter, allowed me to better understand visual rhetoric and the importance of time, but this entry is already obscenely long. Just know that their task is equally as nuanced and taxing as what I have discussed here, and that it contributes as much to the final product. Appreciate all of the expertise that creates the performances that we consume.
Thank you to Sydney, Aubrey, Trent, Erin, Jordan, Emily, Regina, Georgia, Sam, and everyone else who made this experience everything that it was. Much love.
