Aucun appareil Kindle n'est requis. Téléchargez l'une des applis Kindle gratuites et commencez à lire les livres Kindle sur votre smartphone, tablette ou ordinateur.
Pour obtenir l'appli gratuite, saisissez votre numéro de téléphone mobile.
|Prix livre imprimé :||EUR 35,87|
|Prix Kindle :||
Économisez EUR 8,97 (25%)
Merce Cunningham: The Modernizing of Modern Dance 1 , Format Kindle
|Longueur : 328 pages||Word Wise: Activé||Composition améliorée: Activé|
|Page Flip: Activé||Langue : Anglais|
Lecteurs numériques KindleTablettes Kindle Fire
Description du produit
Détails sur le produit
Voulez-vous nous parler de prix plus bas?
|5 étoiles (0%)|
|4 étoiles (0%)|
|3 étoiles (0%)|
|2 étoiles (0%)|
|1 étoile (0%)|
Commentaires client les plus utiles sur Amazon.com
As someone else noted, it's very repetitive and doesn't need to be 300 pages. For example, Copeland writes over and over again about the aesthetics of cool indifference, but that point was clearly made in the introduction. Another issue is how biased it is. I love Cunningham's work but it has its artistic problems. Instead of actually spelling out the details of arguments about those problems, however, Copeland simplifies any criticism and then concludes that the critics just don't get it. For example, Cunningham was a control freak who set up rigorous systems for chance decisions. But as Steve Paxton pointed out, if Cunningham REALLY was into change as a way of taking himself out of the decision making process, then his movement vocabularies (and dance aesthetics) would change from piece to piece. Instead of really digging into the issue of rigorous control and chance and the consistency of Cunningham's aesthetic, Copeland just emphasizes again and again how impersonal and freeing Cunningham's methods and work can be. But it isn't that simple.
Copeland similarly quickly dismisses any approach to dance movement that is anti-intellectual in nature by going back to early modern-dance's emphasis on emotions and the unconscious. But that's just not the complete story; why should we believe that there are only two options: "cool intellectualism" or "hot emotionalism"? Again, Copeland simplifies not only by presenting only two options but also by basing them in Cunningham's early career (e.g. as a reaction to Graham). But Cunningham's career spanned decades and many approaches to dance movement arose that go beyond that facile dichotomy.
Lastly, Copeland dismisses any kind of social critique of Cunningham's work as silly PC identity politics, but again, it's not that simple. At the very least, he needs to engage the rather complex issues of the dancer as person and the possibility of formalist work successfully bracketing the personal, and the political implications of that kind of bracketing. It's academically irresponsible to dismiss the issue (as well as all the quality work on dance, ethics and politics) with a bit of blustery hand waving. But, again, that's Copeland's repetitive argumentative strategy: simplify the issue and then state your alternative conclusion. Anyone who is more informed about dance studies (or logic) will see through this and, since it's so repetitive, will likely get irritated with it.
If you're interested in a more informed and balanced approach to many of the issues that Copeland (kind of) discusses, I would take a look at Susan Leigh Foster's masterful book: "Reading Dancing" Reading Dancing: Bodies and Subjects in Contemporary American Dance