КУДА ПРИШЕЛ ТАНЕЦ, ИЛИ ПРОСТОТА НЕПРОСТЫХ ДВИЖЕНИЙ

Abstract

A recently published book of Irina Sirotkina on the specifics of the dance culture of the twentieth century is under review in this article. This book, compiled as an anthology or textbook, surpasses the objectives of such a manual, being a perfect generalization that takes into account the achievements of anthropology. Sirotkina shows the characteristics of dance as a social phenomenon marking “cultural” social practices, and proves that the 20th century was an era of emancipation, that turned dance from a marker of elitist appropriation into one of the universally relevant semiotic models of culture. The book is not constructed as an introduction to the subject or a consistent presentation of its history, but as a series of problem statements. In particular, the book indicates how Nietzsche’s philosophy influenced the change in body status. Dance is considered not as a form of leisure, but as a form of organization of movement, including labor, with reference to such theorists of proletarian labor as Alexey Gastev. The book analyzes the features of choreography and choreographic pedagogy, and how naturalistic approach, which at the beginning of the 20th century was a mask for emancipation, then itself required certain emotional reinforcements and a support system in the intermedial interactions. The book also shows the socio-political consequences of self-awareness of culture in the form of dance and plastic, and it is proved that ideology of plastic (classicism) now is succeeded by ideology of dance (modernism and postmodernism). At the same time, the author of the book argues that the dance metaphor based on general ideas about movement and the body is strong enough, so that the development of choreography in the 20th century is more lasting than contingent. The article raises the question of whether such a training book can refer to the specifics of dance as a cultural phenomenon of the twentieth century, relying only on the philosophy of dance and the difference between classical and non-classical philosophy in general.