movements toward understanding humans through the anthropological study of dance

Movements Toward Understanding Humans Through the Anthropological Study of Dance [andComments and Reply]Author(s): Judith Lynne Hanna, Roger D. Abrahams, N. Ross Crumrine, Robert Dirks, RenateVon Gizycki, Paul Heyer, Alan Shapiro, Yoshihiko Ikegami, Adrienne L. Kaeppler, Joann W.Kealiinohomoku, Gerhard Kubik, Roderyk Lange, Anya Peterson Royce, Jill Drayson Sweetand Stephen A. WildReviewed work(s):Source: Current Anthropology, Vol. 20, No. 2 (Jun., 1979), pp. 313-339Published by: The University of Chicago Press on behalf of Wenner-Gren Foundation for AnthropologicalResearchStable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/2741929 .

Accessed: 01/03/2013 11:52

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

.JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range ofcontent in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new formsof scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

.

The University of Chicago Press and Wenner-Gren Foundation for Anthropological Research are collaboratingwith JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Current Anthropology.

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded on Fri, 1 Mar 2013 11:52:14 AMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=ucpress

http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=wennergren

http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=wennergren

http://www.jstor.org/stable/2741929?origin=JSTOR-pdf

http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp


CURRENT ANTHROPOLOGY Vol. 20, No. 2, June 1979 ? 1979 by The Wenner-Gren Foundation for Anthropological Research 0011-3204/79/2002-0001$02.35

Movements toward Understanding Humans

through the Anthropological Study of Dance'

by Judith Lynne Hanna

INTRODUCTION

This paper offers a dynamic communication model for the study of dance within the discipline of anthropology. A summary review of the field will provide a context for the presentation. After noting reasons for the initial neglect of dance study and describing the eventual emergence of the anthropology of dance, I shall examine dance in terms of the concerns of the four-field discipline, identify areas of consensus and disagreement among students of dance on goals and definitions, and survey and evaluate some specific approaches. Then I shall present a theoretical orientation that integrates some of these approaches in order to enhance our understanding of Homo sapiens. Because dance research has emphasized textual or contextual approaches, I shall argue that a model combining these and symbolic interaction-thus synthesizing the fundamental categories of anthropological thought, structure and process- is essential. With modification, the model is applicable to the study of other forms of performance, e.g., ritual and play.

Only recently have social scientists considered dance a significant element of human culture and behavior and therefore

1 This paper evolved thanks to the stimulus of two individuals. In our first conversation in 1973, Margaret Mead asked, "What is the anthropology of dance?" Two years later Sol Tax, who had edited several of Kurath's studies, suggested that the thoughts presented in my "Dances of Anahuac" (1975a) should be included in a more general article on dance seen cross-culturally and historically. I thank them for encouraging my work and the development of new approaches. I appreciate the comments of William John Hanna, Richard B. Woodbury, and Dan Ben-Amos on an earlier draft of this paper.

JUDITH LYNNE HANNA is Faculty Research Associate and Lec- turer at the University of Maryland (College Park, Md. 20742, U.S.A.). Born in 1936, she was educated at the University of California, Los Angeles (B.A., 1958), Michigan State University (M.A., political science, 1962), and Columbia University (M.A., anthropology, 1975; Ph.D., 1976). She has held faculty and research positions at Michigan State University, American Uni- versity, Fordham University (Lincoln Center Campus), the Uni- versity of Texas at Dallas, and the University of Ibadan. Her research interests are communication; how opinions, attitudes, and behavior form and change; and meaning in movement. She is currently completing a study of urban interethnic social interaction and cultural dissonance in the United States. Her publications include a volume edited with William J. Hanna, Urban Dynamics in Black Africa (Chicago: Aldine-Atherton, 1971), and To Dance Is Human: A Theory of Nonverbal Communica- tion (Austin: University of Texas Press, 1979).

The present paper was submitted in final form 19 iv 78.

a legitimate subject of study. The researchers' neglect has several explanations. Dance has been disparaged in the West because of prejudices reflecting the Puritanical distrust of bodily beauty and gaiety and the inferior status of theatrical performers. Because the emergent European bourgeoisie attributed the collapse of the French monarchy partly to moral laxity, they were anxious to protect their power, and therefore transformed the body from an instrument of pleasure into one of production (Kern 1975). Furthermore, the body was a victim of social snobbery-a brute linking the bourgeoisie to the lower classes and animal instincts. Most scholars of an "art" form have some minimal experience in it, and disparagement of dance discouraged participation. Besides, scholars tended to be men, and in Anglo-Saxon culture men's dancing had effeminate, homosexual overtones.

Some scholars rationalized the neglect of dance study on the grounds that it was not subject to notation and recording. Cer- tainly, however, its social contextual relations could have been subjected to the same objective, systematic observations, analyses, and reporting.as other forms of behavior, e.g., kinship and economic patterns. In fact, verbal descriptions of movements and systems of notation which permit some analysis have existed for hundreds of years. More understandable is the lack of detailed analyses of dance. On-the-spot notation requires repeated performances, and many dance activities are performed only on special occasions and in unique ways. Until recently, methods for a relatively accurate recording of dance for systematic movement study were limited. Even with the advent of motion picture film at the turn of the century, researchers could not utilize it in many places. When humidity-resistant, durable, and portable cameras and tape recorders became available, the costs, including those of transportation and processing, often remained prohibitive.

Social scientists have felt the need to emphasize "science" in their disciplines, and thus they have tended to avoid the more "humanistic" cultural domain. They have considered verbal discourse to be the primary key to human thought and behavior. They have viewed the sociology of sport and leisure, akin to dance, as demanding little rigor and as the hobby of anti-intellectuals. Furthermore, there has been no literature in theory and method to provide guidance.2

2 "The Anthropology of Dance: A Selected Bibliography" (Hanna 1976b, 1978 rev.) was prepared to meet this need. Kealiinohomoku (1976) presents some valuable notions, although she views dance as a conservative, equilibrial, microcosmic system. My own view, elaborated below, is of dance as a complex, open system of interacting and interpreting individuals who may use dance to innovate

Vol. 20 * No. 2 * June 1979 313



The anthropology of dance has a gestation period nearly half as long as the history of the discipline. Precursors go back to the latter part of the 19th century. Anthropologists have referred to dance, and often described it, from the time of the earli- est studies; topics such as drama, ritual, folklore, recreation, magic, religion, culture, music, and mask accompaniment include dance. Ethnocentrism frequently reigned in these accounts to the extent that dances which differed from ballet or jigs were called "lewd ambling" or "imitative fornication."

Over the years there have been some notable contributors to the anthropological study of dance. Grosse (1909) speculated on the function of dance. Hogbin (1914) provided relatively rich descriptions of dance among the Kaoka-speakers of Gua- dalcanal, and Marett (1914) conceived of religion as danced. Radcliffe-Brown (1964 [1922]:249) pled for recognition of the central importance of dance in his study of the Andaman Is- landers. Boas's (1955 [1928]) study of the structure of art recognized symbolic and expressive aspects of dance. Evans- Pritchard's (1928) article on the Azande beer dance is one of the fuller case studies. Mead (1928, 1940; Bateson and Mead 1942) approached dance from the perspective of culture and personality, viewing the arts as a reversal of norms or a projec- tion of child-rearing patterns. Sachs (1937) provided a theory of dance in cultural context, but he relied on poor secondary sources and a distorted view of the dance of non-Western peoples (see critiques by Youngerman 1974, Kealiinohomoku 1969-70). Franziska Boas (1944) held seminars on the function of dance. Blacking (1962. 1969), Horton (1960, 1963, 1966, 1967), Griaule (1965), Marshall (1962, 1969), and Peacock (1968) provided relatively full dance descriptions and discus- sions of some forms of symbolism. Kurath, a dancer with a master's degree in the history of art and archeology, has con- tributed heavily to the dance ethnology literature.3

Kurath's 1960 CURRENT ANTHIROPOLOGY article "Panorama of Dance Ethnology" describes the state of the field at that time. She mentions few studies of dance conducted by social scientists and even fewer explanatory studies.4 In the light of her overview and subsequent events, the development of the field of the anthropology of dance can be seen as having two phases. Phase 1 has an upward soft sloping curve of progress lasting about 60 years. During this period scholars urged that dance be studied, and the functional paradigm reigned. Phase 2, dis- playing more rapid growth, began in the middle 1960s; conflicting "paradigms" have appeared (see Hanna 1975b). Most of the participants in this generative, turbulent phase have recently acquired the doctorate or are now completing disserta- tions (e.g., Blank 1973, Theeman 1973, Krebs 1975a, Sachs 1975, Volland 1975, Wild 1975, Hanna 1976a, Kealiinohomoku 1976, Williams 1976, Sue Jennings, Jill Sweet, and Richard Marcuse). Some senior anthropologists (e.g., John Blacking, Simon Ottenberg, and Jan-Petter Blom) are also systematically examining dance. For the first time, different approaches (both old and new) are under critical fire.5

Every stage of a field is shaped and limited by the structures in which its practitioners are enmeshed. Although a course in the anthropology of African dance was taught in 1965 and several other anthropology-of-dance courses have been taught

or to mediate or generate conflict. Royce (1977) provides an introduction to the subject, but refers less to studies of dance by social scientists than to the work of others.

3 Gertrude Kurath is the mentor and psychological supporter of several anthropologists now studying dance. She has published numerous articles (e.g., 1946, 1956a,b, 1960) and four books (1964, 1968, 1970; Kurath and Marti 1964; for a list of her works, see Kealiinohomoku and Gillis 1970). Her studies are primarily descriptive, although there is theoretical concern with the diffusion of traits, function, and the interrelation of dance spatial pattern and social structure.

4 See also surveys by Merriam (1974) and Royce (1974a), who did not point out any significant breakthroughs.

since, as well as courses in the anthropology of the arts, music, play, and folklore which include sections on dance (and "dance ethnology" courses in departments of dance, physical education, and music), instructors have, typically, been constrained by unidimensional theoretical perspectives and circumscribed training. Some anthropological training for the study of dance occurs in the aforementioned courses and those on general theory and method, but there is no specific program designed to meet the needs of anthropologists interested in understanding human thought and behavior through the study of dance. Training in different dance forms, performance, observation, and movement analysis is invaluable.6 Being a dancer, however, differs from being an analyst of the dance. A preliminary step in the analysis of an alien dance system is the search for an area of discourse in one's own language or metalanguage which can appropriately serve as a translation instrument (cf. Horton 1964:93 on the analysis of a religious system). Training in filming or videotaping is appropriate for structural analyses of dance (Collier 1967, Krebs 1975b, Schaeffer 1975, Hockings 1975). Reliance on this alone is insufficient, however, for even with several cameras film cannot capture everything. In situ learning is also necessary.

THE ANTHROPOLOGY OF DANCE AS PART OF A FOUR-FIELD DISCIPLINE

The study of dance overlaps the four fields of anthropology and draws upon their theories and methods as well as the prac- tices, theories, and literature of other disciplines (cf. Hanna 1979a for a more extended discussion).

Ethnology, descriptive, analytical, and comparative, generally includes social and cultuiral anthropology. A major task of social anthropology is to discover how dance relates to the characteristics of social life and structure. Social anthropologists attempt to construct a model of reality and explain the existence of dance patterns in terms of the recurring relationships between people and groups of people. For example, among the Ubakala of Nigeria,7 contrastive dance movement patterns between males and females are most marked when their biological and social role differentiation is greatest. Cultural anthropology seeks to understand dance as a system of communication, a system of symbols and meanings for a particular space-time entity. Analyses of dance patterns aim to identify the models (maps, programs, templates) of and for behavior. The goal is to comprehend the reflecting, refracting, or inno- vating mechanisms of dance that provide orientations to the realities of a group and the ways these are to be conceived, felt, and acted upon. Human cognitive processes are the focus. As plants and animals are used in totemism, economic products are used in caste behavior, and speech is used in class dynamics, dance may categorize individuals and thereby structure social

5 The 1977 advertisement for the new periodical Dance Chroni- cle even refers to "a new generation of writers on dance, question- ing the accepted accounts of cultural history and looking at the world of dance in new ways." Indicative of the emergent interest in the anthropology of dance is the current doctoral work of more than 15 anthropology students in the United States and the United Kingdom and the fivefold growth from 1970 to 1975 of the international, interdisciplinary Committee on Research in Dance (CORD), as well as the 1974 launching of Dance Research Journal, in which anthropology has been strongly represented.

6For an excellent discussion of the three major dance notation systems, which has implications for the anthropological investigation of movement, see Kleinman (1975).

7 The Ubakala are a group of about 24,000, one of some 200 Igbo groups located in eastern Nigeria. Dance-play (nkwa) analyses were based on informant comments, observed behavior, and the relation of dance to other symbol systems. Material from this case study will be used illustratively in the following discussion. An extended analysis appears in Hanna (1976a).

314 CURRENT ANTHROPOLOGY



Hanna: ANTHROPOLOGICAL STUDY OF DANCE behavior. Ubakala dance-plays from this perspective are both conservative (communicating Ubakala world view and ordering social relations) and innovative (enacting social drama, mediating paradoxes, and introducing change). They provide pleasurable entertainment and at the same time socially valuable insights, impulses, and demands that can raise social consciousness and propel performers and observers to action. The ecology area of cultural anthropology considers how people use dance to adapt to their physical environment and meet basic needs. Ubakala dance-plays help structure work arrangements and encourage economic productivity through participation criteria for different performances and praise for acquiring and sharing wealth.

Linguistics views dance as language-like and studies it as a closed system. The researcher attempts to identify and describe the movement vocabulary and its groupings, syntax, or semantics. A basic premise is that meaning derives from the relations between parts of the system-the various elements of space, rhythm, and effort-rather than from some external source. Some scholars try to discover the basic generative rules for these relations and their transformations. Distinctions are made between competence (internalized rules for dancing) and performance (what someone does on the basis of knowing such rules). A distinction is also made between creator (choreographer) and imitator. In the Ubakala study, an ideal performance model was developed from the movements of each performing group's leader for the description and analysis of style and structure. In linguistic terms, the movement transcription centers on the idiolect (individual pattern of speech) of the dance leader. It is a lexical transformation from visual imagery on 16-mm motion picture film shot at 24 frames per second. It is not the exact movement made every time the dance is performed; some variation is permitted in different dances as well as in an individual's performance. Rather, it is an instance of a well-accepted version at a particular time. In terms of the selection of groups and leaders by the Ubakala, the model is also a statement of competence (knowledge of dance). A limited number of structures seems to generate dance-plays for different social groups.

Sociolinguistics, the "ethnography of speaking," examines a language in relation to social situations and socialization patterns. From this perspective, dance is explored as a subsystem related to other sociocultural phenomena. Dance has interrelated movements, meanings, and rules which include use-the when, where, who, why, and how. Concern is with the dynamics of variation and choice within a single form of dance or a repertoire. In dance events the focus of analysis is on exchanges between dancers, choreographers, and observers. Occasions, purposes, participants, socialization patterns, and the creative dynamics of different Ubakala dance-plays have been identified. These dance-plays are situationally referential.

Physical anthropology concentrates on human psychobiological foundations, mechanisms, and evolutionary perspectives. Its concern is with the organic, the animality of humans, whereas the other fields focus on the superorganic or human creation. Physical anthropology considers differences between human dance phenomena and other similar animal patterns, H. sapiens universals (i.e., species-specific phenomena), and biological mechanisms which modify the thoughts, behavior, and social relations of individuals. It takes into account aspects of the body (cognitive functioning included; cf. Lex 1974, 1975; Blacking 1977) which have an impact on social interaction. Some scholars believe that the process and products of the arts reveal the evolutionary aspects of symbolization, cognition, and values and attitudes more clearly than other aspects of human creation (cf. Bourguignon 1973). Cognitive processing in movement systems is examined in terms of the lateralization phe-- nomenon (the differential reliance on the left-hemisphere-dom- inated digital, analytical, and abstract mental functioning or the right hemisphere's analogic, synthetic, and spatial focus

between and within cultures, classes, and individuals). In part, the apparent efficacy and acceptability of the Ubakala dance- plays are related to psychobiological bases: the dance-play as a multisensory phenomenon, the importance of vision and motion, biofeedback through body symbolism, and the interplay of communicative expressive skill and distinguishing ability (cf. Hanna 1977b).

Archeology examines dance through time. Kurath and Marti (1964) reconstructed pre-Columbian dance styles of Mexico from an examination of sculpture, painting, prehistoric documents, and ethnographic analogies. On the basis of a communication theory of dance, findings in communication research, and assumptions of the "New Archeology," I have proposed a strategy for using dance to investigate prehistoric processes and advanced the following hypothesis: Although dance in pre- colonial Mexico was devoted to deities and agricultural success, its performance and representation in artifacts served sociopolitical designs; it was used to create, reflect, and reinforce social stratification and a centralized political organization encompassing diverse, geographically dispersed ethnic groups (Hanna 1975a).

GOALS AND DEFINITIONS

Like many of the subfields of anthropology, the anthropology of dance has no unified approach. Anthropologists studying dance would probably agree that their collective identity crys- tallizes in their concern with the body in specialized motion that has sociocultural significance. They assume that dance plays, or has the potential to play, a vital part in many social institutions. The study of dance has a special vocabulary and set of concepts based essentially on Western dance forms and notions of universal biomechanics and kinesiology. There is at least implicit recognition that dance involves concept (notions about dance), process (behavior in relation to dance), product (performance), and function (consequences). These aspects of dance are frequently considered as prisms through which to view who'e societies or subgroups; conversely, these are seen as prisms through which to view dance.

There is disagreement about what to call the study of dance, and the differences in terminology have implications for the goals, scope, and methods of the field. Kurath (1956a:177) describes "choreology" as "the science of movement patterns," and Benesh and Benesh (1956) refer to it as the "scientific and aesthetic study through notation of all forms of movement." Laban (1974:viii) describes choreology as the science of movement syntax.8 The problem with the term "choreology" for the anthropological study of dance is that it usually applies to studies that focus on movement (mostly Western) to the exclusion of vital anthropological concerns.

Kurath (1960:235) defines "dance ethnology" as "the scientific study of ethnic dances in all their cultural significance, religious function, or social place." This labeling implies the exclusion of theater dance and Western social forms and has

8 The movement analyst Laban (1974:viii) elaborates upon the background of the term: "Choreosophy seems to have been a complex discipline in the time of the highest Hellenic culture. Branches of the knowledge of circles came into being and were named 'choreography,' 'choreology,' and 'choreutics.' The first, choreography, means literally the designing or writing of circles. I I . For centuries the word has been employed to designate the drawings of figures and symbols of movement which dance com- posers, or choreographers, jotted down as an aid to memory. . .. Choreology is the logic or science of circles. . .a kind of grammar and syntax of language of movement. . based on the belief that motion and emotion, form and content, body and mind, are in- separably united."

Vol. 20 * No. 2 June 1979 315



tended to be applied to descriptive studies of non-Western or folk dance that are often superficial.

"Kinesics" refers to the systematic study of learned body motion which has communicative value. The term is associated with Birdwhistell (1963, 1970), but his method has not been applied to dance. Nor has the method of proxemics (Hall 1966), the study of humans' relationships to the spatial dimensions of their environment. Furthermore, the study of dance involves the body moving not only in space, but also in time with effort. Thus the terms "kinesics" and "proxemics" seem both too broad and too narrow for the anthropological study of dance.

Blacking (1974) includes the study of music and dance within the term "ethnomusicology." The danger here is twofold. First, it may be assumed that dance is dependent on music or a dimension of it-which is clearly not the case in all dance forms. Indeed, in some respects, dance is as akin to art (particularly conceptual and kinetic art) as to music. Furthermore, dance may be drama, ritual, or play. Second, although the pre- fix "ethno-" can be attached to terms for studies of complex, postindustrial peoples, it is primarily associated with "exotic," "folk," or "alien."

The label "anthropology of dance" offers the potential for investigating any dance in time and space within a broad thco- retical and methodological framework. It has fewer connota- tions than other labels of concentration on the dance of non- Western peoples or of preliterate societies.

A conceptualization of a phenomenon is the keystone of its theory. A definition creates an analytic unit; it provides a basic insight and an initial hypothesis. Dance can, I think, be most usefully defined as human behavior composed-from the dancer's perspective-of (1) purposeful, (2) intentionally rhythmical, and (3) culturally patterned sequences of (4a) nonverbal body movements (4b) other than ordinary motor activities, (4c) the motion having inherent and "aesthetic" value (see Hanna 1979a, 1979b). ("Aesthetic" refers to notions of appropriateness and competency held by the dancer's reference groups which guide the dancer's actions.) Human behavior must meet each of these four criteria in order to be clas- sified as "dance"; each behavioral characteristic is necessary, and the set of four is sufficient. Some may have more significance than others in different sociocultural contexts. This conceptualization is an abstraction generated by analysis of informant specifications and empirical observations, a survey of the literature relevant to dance, and a consideration of dance movement elements and the instrument of dance, the human body.

Other definitions of dance have been proposed. Kurath (1960:234-35) writes, for example, What identifies "dance," which uses the same physical equipment and follows the same laws of weight, balance, and dynamics as do walking, working, playing, emotional expression, or communication? The border line has not been precisely drawn. Out of ordinary motor activities dance selects, heightens or subdues, juggles gestures and steps to achieve a pattern, and does this with a purpose transcending utility.

It is not clear whether Kurath considers dance as human behavior or as including the animal ritualization that ethologists often refer to as "dance" (Pitcairn 1976). The distinction is important. Further, dance may not always have a "purpose transcending utility." Some people believe that their deities love dance, and the devotees perform for the sole purpose of appeasing them. Dances are often a means of training and motivation in work activities. In numerous cultures, dance and "aesthetics" are instrumentally motivated and used.

Kurath's most recent definition of dance appears in WFebster's T'hird International Dictionary:

rhythmic movement having as its aim the creation of visual designs by a series of poses and tracing of patterns through space in

the course of measured units of time, the two components, static and kinetic, receiving varying emphases (as in ballet, natya, and modern dance) and being executed by different parts of the body in accordance with temperament, artistic precepts, and purpose.

My definition differs from this one by leaving purpose open- ended, attributing cultural patterning to dance focusing on nonverbal body movement rather than a static "series of poses"9 and "tracing of patterns," and emphasizing that motor gesture activities are not ordinary and that motion has inherent value.

Kealiinohomoku (1969-70 :28) defines dance as "a transient mode of expression performed in a given form and style of the human body moving in space. Dance occurs through purpose- fully selected and controlled rhythmic movements; the resulting phenomenon is recognized as dance both by the performer and the observing members of a given group." This definition recognizes dance as human behavior, purposeful, and intentionally rhythmical body movement. The concept of transience requires qualification. Dance may more appropriately be called ephemeral, continually becoming in the phenomenological sense. At another level of analysis, however, it may last in the memory of the performer and the memory of the observer, and sometimes in notation, film, or video recording, as drama lasts in play scripts or synopses. Dance may affect the behavior of performer and observer beyond the dance situation. Kealiino- homoku does not distinguish dance from nondance except by the necessity of a group's having the concept of dance (see Mills 1973 and Sieber 1973 on the similar problem of cross- cultural aesthetics). This definitional requisite creates problems for cross-cultural studies and places undue emphasis on verbalized forms of knowing, expressing, and communicating. Her definition also omits several factors I think are important: culturally patterned sequences of nonverbal body movements which are not ordinary, the motion having inherent and "aesthetic" value.

In a definitional refinement, Kealiinohomoku (1972:387) states: "It is understood that dance is an affective mode of expression which requires both time and space. It employs motor behavior in redundant patterns which are closely linked to the definitive features of musicality." Dance, however, is also a cognitive mode; it can convey concepts in much the same way as verbal language, especially poetry. A person can dance without expressing emotion. Redundancy does not characterize all of dance. Indeed, climaxes are often unique patterns. It is not clear how motor patterns are linked to definitive features of musicality. Some groups do not dance to music. Perhaps music is linked to the definitive features of dance, or perhaps the human psychobiological bases of rhythm generate both.

Lomax, Bartenieff, and Paulay (1968 :xv) compare dance with everyday movement in order to examine the hypothesis that "danced movement is patterned reinforcement of the habitual movement patterns of each culture or culture area." Furthermore, they hypothesize (pp. 223-34), dance "is an adumbration of or derived communication about life, focussed on those favored dynamic patterns which most successfully and frequently animated the everyday activity of most of the people in a culture. . . . Choreometrics tests the proposition that dance is the most repetitious, redundant, and formally organized system of body communication present in a culture." If this is a working definition, the criterion of motion with inherent, aesthetic value is omitted. Also, I submit that dance movement may be patterned not only on habitual movement patterns, but also on athletic feats and exotic or inverse movements requiring specific training. The proposition that dance

9 The dances of Twyla Tharp, a contemporary choreographer in the "modern" dance tradition that is associated in America mostly with Isadora Duncan, rarely use the end-stopped poses that occur in ballet; the dancing continues to spiral and shake through every part of the dancer's body.




Hanna: ANTHROPOLOGICAL STUDY OF DANCE is the most repetitious and redundant system of body communication is questionable (cf. Ekman and Friesen 1969, Ekman 1971), since dance is not "ordinary" motor activity and not everyone dances.

Williams (1976:3) provides a relatively comprehensive definition: dancing is essentially the termination, through action, of a certain kind of symbolic transformation of experience. . . ."a dance" is a visually apprehended, kinesthetically felt, rhythmically ordered, spatially organized phenomenon which exists in three dimensions of space and at least one of time. It is articulated in terms of dancing on the level of the articulation of the dancers' bodies; in the body-instrument space which. . .is ninety-dimensional. It is articulated in terms of "a dance" on the level of a pattern of interacting forces; the form space of a dance. . .[is] the empiri- cally perceivable structure which modulates in time. . . . Whatever its surface characteristics, a dance has limitations, "rules" within which it exists and which govern any of its idiomatic or stylistic expressions.

She argues dance's social base and cultural patterning elsewhere. It is not necessary, however, to apprehend dance visually. For example, the Iroquois have a "Dark Dance," a women's medicine rite which is always performed at night, in complete darkness (Kurath 1964:13-14, 143-49). A blind person may perceive dance through auditory, olfactory, or tactile senses. In addition, a person may dance in the absence of an observer. Kinesthetic perception also appears to be unneces- sary, particularly in the case of a dancer in a trance or drugged state.

From this review it is obvious that my conceptualization remains close to established usage while attempting to eliminate its difficulties. Thus dance is not general animal ritualized behavior, only emotional behavior, or (except for some imitative dance) a conditioned response, but complex cognitive, sensory, motor, affective behavior.

THEORETICAL APPROACHES

In the history of anthropology, there is a tension between particularistic description and the aspiration for universal laws of behavior. Consequently, for some researchers a dance study is about the historically unique; for others, the study of dance should contribute to a generalizing, comparative social science. Some anthropologists focus on a culture or a culture area or on cross-cultural theoretical issues. A few view dance phenomenologically and present film or videotape as description and "analysis" (some practitioners of this approach have little training in movement analysis; see Hanna 1975b).

The history of science shows recurrent cycles of differentiation and specialization succeeded by reintegrations on a higher level. The process has certain analogies with biological evolution-wastefulness, sudden mutations, dead ends, and struggle for survival between competing theories. A pool of alternative ideas and behavior is needed to meet theoretical and empirical developments in any field. Some of the different approaches in the contemporary anthropology of dance are as follows (my own work has many of the difficulties noted in the work of others).

FUNCTIONALIST STUDIES

In functionalist studies, the meaning of dance lies in its pre- sumed consequences for social and personality systems. At- tributing function to dance is a way of categorizing it and thus illuminating some aspect of it. Functional typologies as an end in themselves, however, are what Edmund Leach has called "butterfly collecting." A multiplicity of functional explanations has been offered, but the propositions often lack proof and generalizability. Whereas in his analysis of Andaman Islander dancing Radcliffe-Brown (1964 [1922]) found that the indi-

vidual submits to community activity to produce a harmonious unity, in his observations in Central Africa Evans-Pritchard (1965:74) found dances to be the most frequent occasion of disharmony (cf. Lienhardt 1957, Colson 1971, Turner 1967, whose studies support this position). These studies emphasize context and usually slight the "text" or dance movement. It is often unclear whether dance descriptions and functional conclusions are firsthand observations, secondhand reports, or accounts of a single informant or sample of "natives" representative of the group being described. Sometimes whether a dance description is of a single occurrence or a repeated one is unclear. The distinction between manifest and latent function (Merton 1957) is infrequently made. The major problem with functional analyses is that they usually lack comparable units, systematically collected dance data, and explanations for how and why dance fulfills specified functions.

Hatch (1973) presents a useful "behavioral cybernetic approach" that uses systems concepts to account for the relations and interactions between dance performance and psychological, sociocultural, and evolutionary processes. He assumes that a principal function of dance is to control and organize social interactions. Interrelations between dance and socioculture are not specified convincingly, however, and argument for the uni- linear evolution of dance lacks empirical warrant.

STRUCTURAL STUDIES

Structural studies in the dance literature (not in the Radcliffe- Brown or Levi-Strauss tradition) focus on identifying physical movement patterns of space, time, and effort or "steps" and phrases, the rules for combining these, and the resulting regularities in dance form. Units of movement at one level combine to form larger ones at another level. Only some of these units exist in the dancer's consciousness. Structural analyses are rarely linked to sociocultural patterns. They are essential for studying differences between dances, creativity and impro- visation, and how minimal units are put together to form a whole. Descriptive linguistics provides a base. The work of the Eastern European folklorists Martin and Pesovair (1961) is representative; their goal is to construct a typology of Hun- garian dance. Ikegami (1971) has produced a stratificational analysis of a single Indian classical-dance hand gesture. Singer (1974) has related abstract metrical patterns to their concrete realization as sequences of dance movements in Macedonian dance; she states her results as a system of generative rules. Structuralists commonly use musical units as the basis for analyzing dance forms. The problem here is that space and effort elements may be more meaningful for some dance cultures than for others. Sometimes, even in Western dance, dances set the pattern for music, and some have no musical accompaniment. There is a danger of erroneously reducing dance to a dimension of music (cf. Kreitler and Kreitler 1972:179-80).

Kaeppler (1972) attempts to discover significant movements and how they can be combined from the Tongan point of view. By dancing for Tongan teachers and having her performance evaluated by them, she sought an adequate grammar. Prob- lematic issues include the representativeness of the Tongans who were her instructors, whether foreigner and indigene are similarly evaluated, the validity of relying upon verbalizations whether one dances differently depending upon the situation, and how long evaluative criteria have been in existence.

Williams (1978), using a linguistic paradigm after de Saus- sure, explores the potential range and combination of human movements at the level of "phonology" (similar to Laban's conceptualization). She argues that dance is symbolic experience -all dances convey meaning, and meaning is socioculturally determined (Ekman and Friesen [1969] suggest otherwise). To Williams, dance is language-like in being rule-governed. Bloch

Vol. 20 N No. 2 * June 1979 317



(1974) rejects the Saussurian signifier/signified model and instead borrows from the linguistic studies of McCawley, Fill- more, and Lakoff, for whom meaning is lodged in the study of rules of speech combinations.

Lomax, a folk song analyst, with Bartenieff and Paulay, movement analysts (1968), worked with films of different cultures (not randomly selected) and material from the Human Relations Area Files to extract some "extremely general" (p. 24) gross movement features that would permit comparison of dance and "primary sustenance motor behavior" on a worldwide basis. They ignored intracultural variation. Jablonko (1968) analyzed two of the features they isolated-number of active body parts and types of transitions between paths-and concluded that their hypothesis was incorrect, that dance uti- lizes part of the range provided by movement occurring in daily activities. Whether the gross features are meaningful comparative units or are too broad awaits further theoretical and empirical study (see Dance Research Journal 6[2], 1974, for critiques of Lomax et al.'s "choreometrics" by Youngerman, Kealiinohomoku, and Williams; also Maranda 1970, Hanna 1975c).

Future structural investigation may be able to draw upon Tracy's (1974) developing computer system of motor factor analysis to identify the most frequent motifs and elements and the rules governing their combination. His PENTRY program purports to build units into a table showing the probability of going from any given motion into another motion; the GENER program then uses this table to generate new movement sequences with the same overall probability pattern.

Structural studies in dance tend to view dance as mechanical, to overemphasize the product or "text" (movement patterns) of dance at the expense of the context and process (what concepts and circumstances lead to dance, its actual performance, and its interrelation with other sociocultural phenomena). Hymes (1967) and Cicourel (1974), among others, address these issues. Findings in structural studies have not been gen- eralizable, although Laban's often used movement concepts (Hutchinson 1974, Dell 1970) appear to be so. (His interpretations of emotion and movement are not cross-culturally valid.) The source of structure in dance remains to be re- searched. Does it derive from feeling, from cognition, from the body, from some combination of these, or from elsewhere? How do we determine the source?

PHENOMENOLOGICAL STUDIES

Sheets (1967) was the first dance scholar to look at dancing phenomenologically. Her concern, however, was the college dance student's experience; studio, stage, and cross-cultural patterns were not considered. Armstrong (1971) deviates from the notion of art as a manifestation of something else and argues that dance, like all art, is significant in itself. These theoretical studies direct attention to the importance of the intrinsic aspects of dance but neglect concept, context, function, and their interrelationships. Their emphasis on the affective qualities of form requires empirical testing.

COMPARATIVE STUDIES

Comparative studies of dance may be functionalist, structural, phenomenological, or some combination of these. Use of the comparative approach enhances understanding of what occurs in a particular group or society and conduces to broader theories than a single case can provide. Comparison forces the analyst to try to account for the effects of different variables, thus deepening description, analysis, and explanation, and to deter-

mine the generality of propositions. Kurath (1946) and Kea- liinohomoku (1967, 1977) have broadlv compared some characteristics of the dances of two geographic areas. Kurath (1970), Sachs (1975), and Hanna (1976a) have compared dances within a society. The choreometrics study, mentioned above, compared dance "cultures" on a "worldwide" basis. Comparative studies are liable to the criticisms of the other approaches. Us- ing secondary data (literary or film) or primary data collected with different research theories and methods often means that the units being compared are not the same. A lack of common concepts eliminates some dance from consideration. Questions that should have been asked were not; behavior that should have been recorded was not. The International Folk Music Council Study Group for Folk Dance Terminology (1974) has proposed a scheme for comparison beyond individual countries, and the Dance Notation Bureau, New York City, attempts to adapt notation systems to accommodate different forms.

COMMUNICATION STUDIES

Giurchescu (1974) views da:- e semiotically, arguing that folk dance be considered as a nonautonomous, nonverbal language, an essential part of total communication, which has different degrees of meaning in a variety of contexts. Her argument could be extended to include all dance. Whether changing context and functional transformation determine equivalent structural modifications, as she suggests, is a matter for systematic investigation. There is evidence that old wine can fill new bot- tles. Furthermore, there can be contextual and intrinsic meaning. Bloch (1974), on the basis of a linguistic analysis of ritual, suggests that the formalization of dance as a kind of language may be a form of power or coercion. Here the bodily communication of nonritual life is replaced in ritual by dance.

In sum, the trouble with these valuable but partial studies is that they tend to neglect significant aspects of dance concept, process, product, structure, or function, failing to relate these to sociocultural phenomena or to explain how dance "works." Of course, it is necessary to circumscribe one's study for stra- tegic purposes, but the limits of evidence and conclusions need to be recognized and the research findings placed within a broader theoretical context. Narrow theoretical perspectives have often blinded investigators to dance as significant behavior in its own right. Dance is usually viewed as dependent on other sociocultural factors, encapsulating culture and situations and structures in discrete dance performance (e.g., Griaule 1965, Mitchell 1956, Meillassoux 1965, Lomax, Bartenieff, and Paulay 1968, Vatsyayan 1968, Singer 1972, Royce 1974b). Only occasionally is its "feedback" recognized (e.g., Peacock 1968, Horton 1960).

PROPOSED THEORETICAL ORIENTATION

A communication theory (derived from Morris 1955, Barthes 1970, Gumperz 1974, Hymes 1974, Bateson 1972, Levi-Strauss 1963 :364) may allow the capture of much of the complexity of dance and the integration of theoretical perspectives and data from the approaches just discussed as well as from sociolinguistics (Hymes 1967), structuralism (Levi-Strauss 1963, Blacking 1967), ritual and social drama (Turner 1969, 1974; Munn 1973; Mitchell 1956), psychobiology (Berlyne 1971, 1972; Lex 1975; Knapp 1963; Alland 1976; Ornstein 1972; Chapple 1970; Tart 1969; Ekman and Friesen 1969), and aesthetics (d'Azevedo 1973). The communication model systematizes and makes explicit much of what is usually segmented and implicit. Following the anthropological axiom that significance resides in the whole, the model links key dimensions of text and con-




Hanna: ANTHROPOLOGICAL STUDY OF DANCE text. It attempts to encompass both surface phenomena and the underlying reality of which the observer or participant may be unaware.

Psychobiological bases are assumed to explain what is common to all forms of dance by virtue of its being a species- specific activity in which humans have the potential to bestow meaning upon situations they do not directly experience. The universal characteristics of ordering and categorizing the world are manifest in dance. Other animals tend to acquire meanings and grasp concepts through conduct; human beings depend on both conduct and symbols. Sociocultural factors largely determine the structural and processual dynamics. Dance is a system of signs, symbolic action, and shared reality, with its own internal contradictions and pace of change.

Dance is communicative behavior- a "text in motion" (Ku- per 1968:57) or "body language." This behavior underlies most other dance motivations and actions. Dance is a physical instrument or symbol for feeling and/or thought, and it is sometimes a more effective medium than verbal language in revealing needs and desires or masking true intent. Humans are multisensory. Occasionally, they verbalize and listen; more often, they act and watch or feel. The dance medium often comes into play where there is a lack of verbal expression. Movements in dance become standardized, patterned symbols understood by members of a society to express and communicate experiences in the external and psychic world. Birdwhistell (quoted by Lomax et al. 1968:229) explains: "Humans move and belong to movement communities just as they speak and belong to speech communities. . . . there are kinesic [body motion] 'languages' and 'dialects' which are learned by culture members just as speech is learned, and which have a matching distribu- tion with speech, languages, and dialects." While I agree that movements supplement verbal communication, I hold that dance movements in and of themselves have the capability to communicate affectively and cognitively. Through communication individuals learn a culture-the values, beliefs, attitudes, and learned behavior the group shares. Through communication they also contribute to the dynamic, ever-changing phenomenon of culture.

The communication model (fig. 1) suggests the interaction between human endowment, sociocultural context, ecological setting, the dynamics of what dance is, and what is assigned to dance. Of course, effective communication depends upon shared knowledge and the interplay between skillful dance expression and sensitive perception.

For a dance performance, there is a catalyst (A) determining who dances, why, where, and how (vis-a-vis cultural values, society, polity, economy, and religion). For example, a village market, a family birth or death, or a festival makes Ubakala dance-play participation for performers and spectators vir- tually obligatory. The dry season or a moonlit night provides the memory of and desire for the pleasure of a dance-play, the enjoyment of the performance per se and its related socia- bility. Individual or group initiative to conserve social patterns, introduce change, or cope with the behavioral exaggera- tion of contradictory principles in the Ubakala ethos are yet other stimuli to dance-play performance.

Selective perception (B) is the extraction of information from sensorv stimulation on the basis of memory and cognitive structures (relatively permanent functions of mind that act on information to transform it), emotion, hereditary capabilities, learned communication skills, and general sociocultural experience. Ubakala motivations to participate in a dance-play include fear of shame, pleasure (aesthetic involvement, allevia- tion of boredom and desire for arousal, and the opportunity for cathartic experience), social approval, prestige and/or money received for a praiseworthy performance, and/or the need to be aware of what is happening in order to pursue individual and group goals. Furthermore, once a dance-play performance is under way, it commands attention.

The dancer, an incumbent of a social role, makes movement choices with some intent (B) to inform, evaluate, prescribe, and/or effect or without specific intention but with the possibility that information transfer may occur. Intent becomes transformed through the communication medium or channel (C) of dance-play performance. The Ubakala send messages,

(A) Catalytic Soiurce

g * | t~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ndividual, Physical Elements

|Consequences I I I I | Consequences

| Beha vior | | Behavior

(B) | | ~~~~~~~~~~~Catalysts Catalysts (B) D Choreographer-Dancer: (C) A udience: Message Encoding-Decoding Medium-Channel Message Encoding-Decoding

Referents Referents

Selective Audience Selective Perception ro---- Dance Performance 4 Performs Perception Cr - -|

Memory I Memory I

Intent Structures Devices Spheres r I

Intent Structures Devices Spheres or Creativity or

X Creativity

Information Emotion Referents Syntactics Infor matin Emotion

SyntaCtiCS Syntactics

A~~~~~~~~ ~~~M usic Adjunct Song Channels Costume Behavior

Other Consequences

FIG. 1. Dance semiotics: A processual model.

Vol. 20 * No. 2 * June 1979 319



clarified and dramatized, about values (fertility, egalitarianism, innovation, respect, and reciprocity), beliefs, and norms. Rules about what is required, preferred, or permitted govern the combination of dance elements (space, rhythm, dynamics, and body usage). The dancer encodes messages through devices which operate in one or more spheres within rules governing the combination of these elements. The dance performance is the product of movement configurations and sometimes includes adjunct channels such as music, song, and costume.

Communication and systems theories include the concept of feedback (see arrows). Feedback refers to the introduction of information about a performance into the performance system. It may be positive (serving to reinforce performance in its current patterns, as does a Western audience's applause) or nega- tive (serving as a disincentive for the current pattern, as does an observer's refusal to buy a ticket to see another such performance). It involves multiple relationships or elements linked by reciprocal influences. A performer may block out feedback, or "noise" may preclude it. Feedback may be immediate or delayed.

The elements of a communication system affect each other as messages are sent and received. Such a system is not primarily an equilibrial or homeostatic one, but a complex, open, self-directing system of interacting and interpreting individuals adapting to external and/ or internal change (see Buckley 1968). Power, defined as the ability to influence others' predis- positions, feelings, attitudes, beliefs, and/or actions, is exer- cised through interaction-the exchange of messages between individuals. Interaction in the dance-play performance may involve dance-group participants' interacting among themselves, particularly in practice sessions, and leader-group or dancer- musician exchanges. Audience-performer interaction (C, D) may involve individuals and/or groups. A group is not necessarily homogeneous in its response. Assuming no interference, the audience decodes messages of intrinsic form (what Arm- strong [1975] calls the "affecting presence") and/or extrinsic reference and makes some assessment with selective perception (D). The audience reaction may have recognized, unrecognized, or no effect. However, the performance may have implications for the dancer, the observers, and./or the external event structure (the catalytic environment). The arrows indicate feedback possibilities.

Performers sensing something inappropriate in a performance may alter or terminate it. They receive feedback from their own kinesthetic proprioceptors and other internal sources concerning the dance instrument's response to expression. Among themselves, dancers respond to the unfolding intrinsic properties of movement style and structure and the qualities of other channels. Audience members' praise may stimulate continua- tion or improvement of a performance; their denigration may lead to a change or termination. Feedback related to the outcome of a performance occurs through performers' or spectators' thoughts and actions. Interference may be caused by, for example, natural events such as rain, the circumstance of a loose animal, a fight, or the presence of outsiders.

The presentation of dance meaning and behavior may be transformed into other sociocultural phenomena and vice versa. Any of the above components may be taken as a point of entry into the description and analysis, but the ultimate ethnographic statement made about dance should incorporate them all.

Dance is meaningful behavior in three interrelated and over- lapping domains: pragmatics, semantics, and syntactics.

Pragmatics focuses on the relation of signs to interpreters, the "real-life" level of antecedents, consequences, and ideology (cf. Becker 1974). It deals with the origin and uses (purpose and occasion) and the effects (manifest and latent functions) of signs within the context of the ritual behavior or event in which they occur. Pragmatics focuses on the participants, the

users of the dance "language," the encounter between dancer and spectator. It involves information transference (or intent to communicate) on the part of the choreographer and/or performer. The "why" of communication addresses social structure, dance vis-a-vis groups in society, and the role of the dancer. The interdependence of semantics and syntax appears in the pragmatic domain.

For example, one function of the Ubakala dance-play is to mediate social relations and contradictory values. It provides a vehicle for groups excluded from formal decision-making bodies (women and youth) to exert power. It helps to mediate the conflicting value orientations of individualistic competitive achievement versus cooperation and interpersonal dependence, desire for change versus continuity with seniority, respect and obedience to leaders versus egalitarian distrust of assertive authority. The merging of elements of reality and fantasy characterizes the dance-play. When a problem (a paradox) portrayed in the dance-play remairn unresolved or intensifies, the boundary between play and nonplay may be crossed and sym- bolized conflict may become real. Dance-plays have the potential to encapsulate the issues and phases of social dramas (described by Turner 1974) by communicating a breach of norms fomenting a crisis, ameliorating a conflict, proclaiming a schism, or celebrating a conciliation. The dance-play permits expression usually precluded in other modes and situations and is often the initial step in a greater process of social action. On occasion, the dance-play becomes a deadly serious transformation. It is a means through which social realities are intersub- jectively constituted and communicated and may lead to emergent structure, culture, and behavior (cf. Peckham 1965).

Semantics focuses on the relation of signs to what they signify and information content, the substantive nature of movement patterns. It may include syntax, as noted below. Barthes (1970:57) writes, "meaning is above all a cutting out of shapes." Shapiro (1974) argues that semiotic theories are defi- cient insofar as they are unable to give an account of the way a sign is representative of the object. In the analysis of dance, the use of a grid like that of table 1 is helpful in identifying forms of representing and presenting. The devices and spheres in the grid are categories of conceptualization. Developed in the course of analyzing dance field data (see Hanna 1978a), the grid is a step toward meeting the need Mehrabian (1972:179) identifies: "The only comprehensive system of [dance] notation describes movements merely as motion, with no reference to what they signify (Hutchinson 1970). Such reliance on physical description alone for nonverbal and implicit verbal behavior is inadequate. . . . it fails to provide guidelines for identifying socially significant implicit behaviors."

There are at least six devices for conveying meaning that may be utilized in dance: concretization, icon, stylization, metonym, metaphor, and actualization. Each device may be conventional (customary, shared legacy) or autographic (idiosyncratic or creative expression of a thing, event, or condition).

A concretization is a device which produces the outward aspect of a thing, event, or condition, for example, the mimetic portrayal of an animal. It is an imitation or replica.

An icon represents most properties or formal characteristics of a thing, event, or condition and is responded to as if it were what it represents. For example, the Hopi believe the masked kachina dancer is supernatural and treat it with genuine awe. The icon is a human transformation found among groups which believe in possession, the supernatural manifesting itself in specific human dancing patterns.

A stylization encompasses somewhat arbitrary gestures or movements which are the result of convention, for example, pointing to the heart as a sign of love, performing specific movements as a badge of identity, or using dance to create




Hanna: ANTHROPOLOGICAL STUDY OF DANCE abstract images within a conceptual structure of form (as in many of George Balanchine's "pure" ballets).

A metonym is a motional conceptualization of one thing representing another of which it is an attribute or extension or with which it is associated or contiguous in the same frame of experience, for example, a war dance as part of a battle. It can be conceived of as a sample.

A metaphor expresses one thought, experience, or phenomenon in place of another which it resembles to suggest an anal- ogy between the two, for example, the dancing of the role of a leopard to denote the power of death (see Kirstein 1970 for examples in ballet).

An actualization is a portrayal of one or several of the dancer's usual roles, for example, the dancing by Louis XIV of the role of king and the treatment of him as king.

Meaning usually depends on context; indeed, some scholars argue that all meanings are situational. The devices for encapsulating meaning seem to operate within one or more of seven spheres: (1) the sociocultural event and/or situation, (2) the -total human body in action, (3) the whole pattern of the performance, (4) the discursive aspect of the performance (the sequence of unfolding movement configurations), (5) specific movements, (6) the intermesh of movements with other communication media (for example, dance meaning is inseparable from song, music, costume, accoutrements, and/or speech), and (7) dance movement as a vehicle for another medium (for example, dance as merely background for a performer's poetry recitation). Singly or in combination, the devices allow for consideration of all message material in terms of possible relations to context. The devices are signs (indications of the existence, past, present, or future, of a thing, event, or condition) that may function as signals when they are directly related to the action they signify (for example, a war dance to herald a battle; cf. Hanna 1977a). They are mechanisms for encoding the meaning of a motor expression and may bear upon its ki- netographic shape. Figure 2 presents a range of transformation possibilities from motor behavior through any one or more of the devices to a sign or signal. For example, reading the figure upward from the left, the motor action and concept of fighting may become associated with problems of land use. The dancer may convey this through a concretization and/or other device, as indicated by the solid lines. Emotion such as anxiety (reading upward from the right) may transform into the notion of

flight or fight, which may in turn be conveyed as an icon, stylization, metonym, and/or metaphor, as indicated by the broken lines. Here the more concrete sensate makes accessible the abstract insensate (cf. Langer 1957:131).

We know that of millions of potential stimuli in an individual's environment, only certain ones are selectively perceived, that species-specific patterns of perception probably exist, and that there are culture-specific patterns. Thus the general concepts of space, time, energy, mind, and body which comprise the dance phenomenon are assumed to be related to their specific use by the dance instrument (body) and its motional elements (time, space, effort), the model (aesthetic) for distinguishing the relevant from irrelevant. On the assumption that dance cognitive-sensori-affective-motor patterns are the outcome of experience with the body in time, space, and effort, ascertaining such perception and the assigning of meaning helps us understand how dance communicates. Koestler's (1967) thesis is that the bisociation of two habitually incompatible matrices provides arousal and creates aesthetic impact (cf. Berlyne 1971, 1972; Fisher 1970, 1974; Turner 1969, 1974). In dance, the shapes created by the human body with its at- tendant body image (recollected and unconscious sensations, perceptions, and experiences) may be juxtaposed with the matrices of society or cosmology.

Among the Ubakala, there are conventions for encoding meaning in the dance-plays on the basis of age and sex, although each individual is permitted some symbolic coding which is especially related to his or her own life.10 Meaning appears to be found in the spheres of the sociocultural event, total human body in action, total pattern of the performance, discursive aspects of performance, specific movements, and intermesh with other communication media, namely song and music.

In the sphere of specific movements, the message is occasionally transmitted using a concretization device such as mimetically cradling an infant in the dance-plays celebrating birth. Married women with offspring joyously celebrate the

10 The analysis is based on what Ubakala people said, what they did, and the relation of verbalizations and behavior to other actions and symbolic systems. Since I did not use a random probability sample of dancers and spectators, I use words such as "appears" and "may." Native exegesis and researcher analyses merge.

TABLE 1

SEMANTIC GRID FOR THE ANALYSIS OF DANCE (HERE APPLIED TO UBAKALA DANCE-PLAYS)

SPHERE

Intermesh Vehicle Whole Discursive Specific with Other for Other

DEVICE Event Body Performance Aspects Movements Media Media

Concretization Conventional. x x x x x x Autographic .x x x x x x

Icon Conventional . . Autographic.

Stylization Conventional. x x x x x Autographic .x x x x x

Metonym Conventional. x x x x Autographic x x x x

Metaphor Conventional .x x x x x Autographic .x x x x x

Actualization Conventional. Autographic .

Vol. 20 * No. 2 * June 1979 321



birth of a child and communicate the news to a new mother's kin, as well as mark their identity as mothers (a woman's prestige is related to the number of her progeny) and their identity as an influential group. Concretization is also found in the enactment of a battle in a men's second-burial (ceremonial following interment) dance that often heralds a confrontation among men. Another form in the sphere of specific movements is a stylization device, the vigorous movement of the pelvic girdle and upper torso by young people to highlight secondary sex characteristics and energy for imminent adult social, political, and economic roles. Women symbolize fertility stylistically with undulations and hip shifts to mark status advances with the birth of a child (rebirth of an ancestor).

In terms of devices of semantic communication, Ubakala dance seems to be a pervasive metonym. As specialized cultural motion, dance is metonymical to the motion of life and the Ubakala ethos of action. The processes of reproduction and re-creation in the human-supernatural cyclical pattern of reincarnation merge. The ancestors continue their existence in the dancers' bodies. In the spheres of event and total performance there is a vivid presentation of the unity of lineage. At the death of an elderly respected woman who has borne many children and achieved other forms of wealth, her relatives dance to help effect her passage to the ancestor world. Simi- larly, dance effects the passage of a deceased elderly man. Dance as metonymical to the ethos of action is further exem- plified in the use of the dance-play to communicate world view and order social relations.

A concretization device occurring in the first six spheres is the representation by men and women of anger at the death and physical absence of a beloved one by dancing with weapons.

Women and youth use stylization in the spheres of event, body, performance, and specific movements to convey an attitude of respect toward the "life-charged," mystically control- ling, and retributive earth. Posture is forward-oriented; focus is most commonly downward; movement appears to receive

vitality from the earth and in turn to nourish it. Ubakala at- tach much sentiment to the land. Ala, the earth deity, is all- merciful mother, food and clothing come from the land, and ancestors are buried in the earth to await reincarnation.

Dancing to celebrate the birth of a child serves as a metaphor in all spheres except that of vehicle for other media for safe passage to different villages, achievement of wealth and prestige, and parent-child and spouse relations. In the past, one obtained protection to visit and trade in villages other than one's own through marriage. Strangers were liable to be cap- tured and sold into slavery or buried to accompany a pres- tigious deceased individual in the journey to the ancestor world. The newborn represents an increase in the labor force and the potential for wealth. A parent properly cares for a child so that the child may play the reciprocal role in the parent's old age, second burial, and reincarnation. Married women from the same natal village dancing together, as in the Nkwa Umunna ("Outsider" Relations' Society Dance-play), is a metaphor for their support of each other against the bonds of blood which bind their husbands in this patrilineal, patrilocal society. Wom- en often unite to "sit on a man" to sing and dance about perceived enfringements of their rights and thus suggest that remedial action be taken. Response to the performance is in part generated by the history of the 1929 "women's war," with its unheeded dance-play message. Inattention to the women's danced grievances about the possibility of being taxed and the abuses of indigenous representatives of the colonial government led to violence that had local and international repercussions; the women moved the mighty British to alter their administra- tion of eastern Nigeria.

Women's and youth's dance-plays may be metaphors in the spheres of event, performance, specific movements, and intermesh with song for anarchy, revolution, or violence. The dance- plays sometimes present veiled threats. They remind authority to keep within appropriate bounds. Leadership is competitive, achievement-oriented, and in flux. Women have successfully

Subject (dancer-spectator)

Subject (dancer-spectator) Signal

Sign

Vehicle for Transformation: Dancer's Body Concretization Icon Stylization Metonym Metaphor in Motion

L --------- ______________-J------------ ----- r----- Choate concept Inchoate concept

(e.g., awareness (e.g., preverbal of purpose of body sense of

fighting) fight or flight)

l~~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ I

Organized motor behavior Symptomatic behavior

(e.g., fighting) (e.g., anxiety)

FIG. 2. Transformations of cognitive-affective-sensori-motor behavior in dance available for sociocultural phenomena.




Ilanna: ANTHROPOLOGICAL STUDY OF DANCE united against those whom they perceived to have abridged their rights. Young men soon become adult participants in the leadership councils. Youth dances metaphorically refer to the energy and endurance required for assuming adult roles. The young girls' parodied waltz dance is a metaphor in the spheres of performance and specific movements for colonial penetration (the pierced shell of traditional autonomy), rural- urban interaction, and modern and novel behavior patterns.

In the sphere of specific movements, the circle appears as a metaphor for safety, solidarity, stability, and the cyclical characteristics of agricultural societies and the process of reincarnation; it correlates with dance-plays related to peace and fertility. Venturing far beyond the home village was dangerous because of the perils of war, slavery, wild animals, and the un- known. The men's warrior-dance use of relatively large space and angular lines seems to be a metaphor for engagement in the wider, dangerous and unstable world. Because Ubakala believe clockwise movement is the path of the dead, this spatial pattern may also metaphorically indicate sorrow or the dis- pleasure of the ancestors; counterclockwise movement expresses pleasure.

Contrastive movement patterns are metaphors for distinct social roles and serve as markers and boundary-maintaining mechanisms. In terms of the movement use of space, time, effort, and body parts, when the two sexes are similar in age but very different in biological and social role-namely when the women are life-givers and the men are life-takers-the dance movement patterns diverge most markedly. The male "warriors " tension, rapid speed, and varied spatial use is to destruction as the "mothers'" relaxed movement, slow speed, and unvaried spatial use is to creation. Furthermore, men's directional changes are more angular, with marked succession and segments. Body shapes are more varied and complex. Whereas men dance in a circle extrusively, stepping in and out, leaping up and down, and moving on the ball of the foot, the women use the circle intrusively, have a more homogeneous spatial level, and move predominantly on the whole foot. Rapid speed and varied spatial use is to destruction as slow speed and limited spatial use is to construction. The warrior's killing thrust is quick-paced; he ventures abroad. The woman's long period of gestation and suckling restricts mobility.

Syntactics consists of the rules dictating how signs may be combined. It is the grammar of how the realm of movement style and structure is related to the realm of meaning, and it is critical to aesthetics viewed as notions of appropriateness and competency. Here the meaningful motor units are essentially Laban's processual movement concepts, based on the architec- ture and function of the body and distinguishing six dimensions of space, four of rhythm, four of dynamics, and three of characteristic body usage (Laban 1974, Hutchinson 1970; see Ap- pendix). With the accumulation of movement studies, we may identify additional motor units or recognize a need to modify these categories. Units of meaning or structural units may be found in a movement or phrase, a wavelike motor pattern marked by alternations of activity and rest which cluster distinguishing traits, and the rules of combining motor units within itself and with other phrases. Syntactics governs patterns of moving and also of rest and exhibiting the intention to move.

Some linguists argue that semantics and syntactics may not be separable, i.e., that meaning is lodged in rules of combination. The anthropologist Ortner (1975:166) refers to the "in- tertransposition of form and content." Goodman (1975), a philosopher, also argues that subject is involved in style, the perceived regularities of an act at any time or place. A property of a statement made, a structure displayed, or a feeling conveyed is considered stylistic when it identifies a work with one rather than another artist, period, region, or school. Style and

structure are often referred to as form, the "how." A different way of saying something (how) may be saying a different thing (what). For example, "minimal" dance, with its use of everyday movement, is used to refer to the subject of the everyday common person (Siegel 1974) and to suggest that dance is not just for the elite trained performer.

Linguistic approaches to the study of dance include the search for generative forms and their transformations. The transcription of an Ubakala dance sample using Laban's movement concepts and a distinctive-feature analysis of each dance yields several principles which generate dance-plays for warriors and for mothers. In the warrior dance, tension, rapid tempo, and linear noncircular spatial patterns are characteristic; these deep structures can be realized by bourree (tiny rapid steps on the ball of the foot), lunge, and slash movements. In the mothers' dance, non-tense effort, slow tempo, and curvilinear spatial patterns generate the wave-walk (the upper torso undulates up and forward with one step and scoops down and backward with the next step to create a wavelike motion), contract-release (with the torso nearly at a right angle to the ground, the spine curves upward, making the torso convex, and then creates a concave shape), and hip-shift (hips and but- tocks shift from side to side during locomotion or movement in place and may also rotate, making two small circles when shift- ing from side to side) movements.

SUMMARY

The anthropology of dance has theoretically orienting statements that identify key concepts and variables, establish criteria for isolating the phenomena under study, and specify assumptions about the nature of the units, their occurrence, and the way these are articulated in the operation of a system. Re- lations between dance elements and between dance and cultural values, social phenomena, or environmental conditions are described, but there is as yet no specification of the conditions under which one result occurs rather than others. The anthropology of dance is grappling with both the crucial epistemologi- cal and methodological issues of anthropology as a whole and the growing pains of a relatively new area of concentration.

This paper has surveyed the context within which an integrative model for the anthropological study of dance grew, discussed how dance can illuminate contemporary interests within the concerns of a four-field discipline whose aim is to understand humans, and evaluated the strengths and limitations of some specific approaches. It has presented a model that attempts to incorporate the strengths of various approaches and that appears to account for more aspects of dance than others. This model is necessarily general and in need of revision, for the power and specificity of a theory depend on its applications. Although it evolved and is illustrated here in connection with dance, it has relevance for a wide variety of performance types, such as ritual and play. The accumulation of studies using comparable units and accounting for the structures and dynamics involved will tell us about the nature of human creation, perception, performance, and communication.

APPENDIX: MOVEMENT DATA CATEGORIES

The visual and/or kinesthetic result of energy release in time and space through muscular response to a stimulus is the essence of dance. Its structure (interrelation of parts) and style (characteristic mode and quality of all the contributing elements) can be analyzed in these terms:

Vol. 20 * No. 2 * June 1979 323



Space (design) Direction (path the moving body cuts through space) Level (high-weight on ball of foot; low-body lowered

through flexing knees; middle-normal stand; elevated; kneeling; sitting; lying)

Amplitude (size of movement, relative amount of distance covered or space enclosed by the body in action)

Focus (direction of eyes and body) Grouping (overall spatial pattern of movement in relation to

dancer, created dance space) Free-form or organized pattern (individual, couple,

small group, team-linear or circular, symmetrical or asymmetrical)

Physical link (none, parts of body, length of contact) Shape (physical contour of movement design-includes di-

rection, level, amplitude) Rhythm (time, flow)

Tempo (rate at which movements follow one another) Duration (relative length of movements, patterns, perfor-

manice) Accent (rhythmically significant stress) Meter (basic recurrent pattern of tempo, duration, and ac-

cent) Dynamics (force, relative amount of energy, effort-tension

and relaxation released by the body to accomplish movement) Space (indulgence-minimum or maximum use; "direct"

straight lines or "flexible" curves and deviations) Flow (control, continuous transfer of energy which qualifies

movement-free, unimpeded, or bound, hampered) Locomotion (means of moving from one place to another) Projectional quality (texture produced by combination of

elements-relative quickness or slowness of energy release in space)

Characteristic use of body (instrument of dance) Posture (movement that activates or is largely supported

through the whole body) Locomotion (movement that involves a change of location

of the whole body, e.g., walking, running, leaping, hop- ping, jumping, skipping, sliding, galloping)

Gesture (movement that involves only a part, e.g., rotation, flexion, extension, vibration)

Comments by ROGER D. ABRAHAMS

Department of English, University of Texas, Austin, Tex. 78712, U.S.A. 30 viii 78

Hanna implicitly asks, but does not answer, what is dance? Is it a genre of enactment-a distinctive area of expressive behavior derived from our Western notions of dance that contrasts, on the one hand, with other expressive codes and, on the other, with other meaning-laden movements of the body, such as gestures, and other monitored and practiced movements, such as acrobatics, marching, jogging, and cheerleading? There is little doubt that a language of body movement exists: there is a vocabulary of moves and a gathering of them in something like a syntax that permits sets of moves to be assigned meaning and value and therefore to be regarded as part of the expressive cultural repertoire. Stylized movements of any kind, especially where they are assigned meaning and value, may be studied in themselves and in relation to other performances within a group's repertoire of expressive devices. All this, however, has been assumed by the profession for some time.

Especially in her remarks on the Ubakala, we are asked to take the author's word that the meanings assigned to dance movements are the messages sent and received. We are not told

how much native exegesis she discovered and how much she must infer from a closely mapped relationship between dance form and movement and the other more verbally adumbrated expressive-symbolic enactments of that group.

I would like to formulate the problem from a more folkloristic perspective (especially since the author does not include folklore as one of the disciplinary ways into dance). Dance is to all other bodily movement as song is to speech and music is to the entire realm of sounds, even noises. Song, music, dance are self-consciously stylized behaviors embodied in framed events or enactments. They call attention to themselves as significantly ordered expression. Their order involves enough regularity of pulse and redundancy of themes to invite participation. By their very employment, they signal that some kind of enactment is taking place-a performance, a ritual, a ceremony, a game, or simply a way of drawing attention to self in the midst of less intense engagements. The meaning of the arrangement of tones, words and tones, or movements arises from the placing of a generic frame around the activity. Thus, dancing, regarded as a set of movements with a sense of beginning and ending, becomes a dance-just as singing becomes a song when such a frame is placed around it. The message of the frame repeats "This is a dance" with each unit of movement, and it is this special self-consciousness that distinguishes a dance from any other kind of movement. Surely we have little trouble telling the difference between, say, marching and dancing, but not on grounds other than the nature of the frame placed around the activity-that is, what the community of dancers and onlookers calls it. A dance is, then, an activity which is carried out by members of communities that have separated movement from other expressive languages and held it up to something like aesthetic judgment.

As dance is a self-conscious extension of familiar body movement, the question will always remain, when does walking or running or marching or jumping become dancing? The answer can only be when those in movement become sufficiently conscious of stylistic considerations that they control through practice and rehearsal.

Beyond this, one can profitably regard dance as a framed and self-conscious activity, a structured behavior that can be related to other structured behaviors within the same group and can therefore be employed metaphorically to achieve or reinforce larger meanings or values. By this, I simply mean that groups seem to have "deep" or "root" metaphors. Couple- dancing, for example, comes to have meaning not only in its employment in the dance-of-life we call courtship, but also in that having a man and a woman facing each other and coordi- nating their movements is a rendering of the same organizing principle as can be observed in the husband-wife dyad in the nuclear family. Similarly, the square dance as we use it today is a self-consciously old-fashioned rendering of community which includes couples but makes some kind of statement about extending beyond the dyad to make meaningful movement. The circling of the square, in fact, is the figure which recurs in all such nostalgic, self-conscious backward-looking forms (like the layout of the county courthouse and square, the way the Euro-American quilt is stitched and pieced, and so on). I am attempting here to be no more than anecdotal and suggestive, but surely, if dance carries meaning, it is in some kind of analogic and even homologic arrangement like that found in other expressive forms.

by N. Ross CRUMRINE 1670 Eariston Ave., Victoria, B.C., Canada V8P 2Z7. 6 ix 78

Hanna's article represents an excellent summary of the anthropology of dance and provides a general model for continued study. As she points out, her project is especially difficult, both because of Western rejection of dance as immoral and a waste of time and because dance has become a highly stylized art




Hanna: ANTHROPOLOGICAL STUDY OF DANCE form or been relegated to social occasions. A general concept of dance has serious difficulty rising above these cultural limitations. For these reasons, a definition of dance is critical if a study is to open new ground. Hanna's definition is well constructed and considered, but it might be useful to specify one of its aspects. For Hanna dance is "purposeful . .. body movements," but she does not say what might be meant by "purposeful." She turns away from views of dance as having a "purpose transcending utility," yet I consider this missing factor crucial to the ordering of the variables in her model.

In researching ceremonialism in the Southwest and in north- western Mexico, I was at first confused to read about "rain dances" and a "Yaqui Easter Dance." I could not conceive of dancing as a part of Mayo processions and Parisero (Chapako- ba) pantomime and burlesque (see Crumrine 1969, 1974a, b, 1976, 1977). In terms of Hanna's model, it now seems reason- able to recognize a dance component in Mexican Easter ritual. Would a typical folk Catholic procession qualify as a "dance"? To some degree processions involve "(1) purposeful, (2) intentionally rhythmical, and (3) culturally patterned sequences of (4a) nonverbal body movements (4b) other than ordinary motor activities, (4c) the motion having inherent and 'aesthetic' value." Mayo and Yaqui processions prove more complex, as they include the traditional dance specialists, the Paskola and Deer dancers, who dance along with the procession as their musicians play and the Paskome (fiesteros) move (dance?) back and forth along with the motion of the procession. Of course, processions have specific locational goals whereas modern Western dancing takes place in a single location, but this would not seem to be a crucial difference.

Considering dance in ritual contexts leads one, however, to much of ethnic dance and to trance dance and shamanistic performance. The meaning of these forms of dance certainly appears to be closely associated with ideas of power and with transformations which either confer power or demonstrate its presence. These examples suggest that dance does have a "purpose transcending utility." Even dance which is "a means of training and motivation in work activities" produces a transformation and reveals the power to unify and motivate those work activities. Ballet and modern dance demonstrate the power and bodily control which the individual has achieved through years of training. In these terms the Iroquois "Dark Dance" is not an anomaly, but a dance variant of power seeking.

The communication aspects of dance may be ordered and integrated in terms of transformation and power gain. The research of Bateson, Berlyne, Levi-Strauss, Munn, and Turner goes beyond Hanna's application of it in its emphasis on the transformational powers of communication, of anomalous conflicting information, and of myth and symbolism. Liminal conditions, which characterize dance-plays as described by Hanna, provide situations of openness and innovative possibilities, situations of power either to reinforce traditional symbolism and social structure or to create new symbolic or social solutions to intellectual inconsistencies or social conflicts. Hanna is at her best as she reveals these processes in action in the Ubakala dance-plays. In my research on the Mayo Parisero mask and burlesque (Crumrine 1969, 1974a), I have applied the methods and insights of Berlyne (1966a, b) and Turner (1964) in demon- strating that liminality is characterized by transformations which generate power to resolve cognitive and social inconsistencies and reinforce traditional values and beliefs. Steven Lutes, who was trained as a Paskola dancer while he was doing fieldwork among the Yaquis, has told me that Yaqui Paskolas are most concerned with the dreams they have after a continuous two- or three-day performance, which involves both dance and entertaining pantomime and burlesque. These dreams are conceived of as highly significant power manifesta- tions, in spite of the fact that the Paskola is a comic figure.

I agree with Hanna that "meaning usually depends on context" and "semantics and syntactics may not be separable"

(see Crumrine 1968). Yet a communication model should include some notions of content. To her model, I would add that dance communicates notions of power by means of transformation; dance has a purpose which involves the acquisition or manifestation of power. These notions, I would argue, are necessary elements in an anthropological concept of human dance. By means of this amplification of the concept, the elements of Hanna's model may be ordered to produce something more than a programmatic statement.

by ROBERT DIRKS Anthropology Program, Illinois State University, Normal, Ill. 61761, U.S.A. 6 ix 78

Because dance has so many of the characteristics that Morris (1956) associates with the ritualization of movement, and because it is a component of so many rites and ceremonies, any theory of dance deserving anthropological consideration must in part be a theory of ritual. Hanna feels that her scheme can be modified to deal with ritual generally, and her perspective certainly seems to offer a broad enough foundation. She achieves this breadth by synthesizing a number of orientations, display- ing a refreshing eclecticism that contrasts with the theoretical exclusivity often encountered among practitioners of the dra- matistic mode of ritual analysis. Several months ago, I had occasion to hear an address by one of the foremost exponents of this approach and was dismayed to find symbolic analysis posed as an alternative to behavioral study, the latter characterized as more appropriate to the investigation of avian rites than of human ones. Students of dance can ill afford such a parochial attitude toward movement-oriented methodologies, and Hanna wisely considers these perspectives complementary.

The dance medium, in Hanna's view, often comes into play when verbal expression is lacking. I suspect that this may be true for ritual generally. Perhaps ritual and ordinary speech stand neither as alternatives for communicating the same information nor as fully redundant systems that provide one another added emphasis. Each may exist as a more or less specialized channel for conveying information that the other cannot handle as effectively.

If this is so, then are we to believe that dance or any other form of ritual evolved specifically to carry such subtle and complex cultural meanings as Hanna describes in her consideration of pragmatics, semantics, and syntactics? My skepticism is based on the assumption that human ritual, like the rituals of other animals, tends to evolve toward making information more conspicuous and less ambiguous. How can ritual, danced or otherwise, render cultural abstractions (notions such as structure, world view, and ethos) any less ambiguous than the medium of language? Indeed, ritual seems grossly inferior to unadorned prose if only because, in order to enhance con- spicuousness and arrest attention, ritual distorts the common- place. It renders the ordinary extraordinary, favoring outlandish movements (e.g., dancing, marching, etc.), unusual speech (e.g., singing, chanting, etc.), strange costumes, and performances that highlight pretended exceptions to the natural order, be they visually "demonstrated," poetically asserted, or dogmatically believed. Ethnologists now routinely conclude that ritual veils meaning in metaphor or contains some dark secret, without entertaining the possibility that it simply may be a rather poor communicator of cultural norms, values, and attitudes. Perhaps ritual trades off the ability to communicate clearly in this dimension in order to achieve dramatic effect, to focus attention on another domain of meaning-one that has to do more with immediate, concrete experience than with abstract referents.

What may be really unique about ritual, aside from its attention-getting properties, is that it commits people to

Vol. 20 * No. 2 * June 1979 325



performing and experiencing activities and relationships. Work as diverse as that of Lorenz (1966) and Rappaport (1971) suggests that ritual is more than a symbolic event "standing for" or "representing" something else; it indicates an extant state of affairs within and among participants, a state which may or may not be taken seriously-that is to say, may or may not affect subsequent decisions and actions-depending on the presence or absence of ludic signals.

Hanna's model seems fully capable of coping with these hypothetical points. I would caution, however, that care be taken to avoid the implicit assumption that dance and other rituals differ from nonritual communication only insofar as each mode encodes and transmits messages in distinctive ways. Any description framed in terms of a communication model must not only account for a range of multichanneled (e.g., verbal vs. nonverbal) and multitargeted (e.g., cognition vs. emotion) modes of transmission; it must also be prepared to deal with a range of messages with spatiotemporal referents as diverse as the "here and now" and the "never to be."

by RENATE VON GIZYCKI Im Rosental 12, 3500 Kassel-Willelmshlhe, Federal Republic of Germany. 9 ix 78

Hanna's careful study deserves a detailed response. For want of time I shall have to restrict myself to some more personal remarks.

The author's explanations for researchers' neglect of dance as "a significant element in human culture and behavior" are convincing and poignant and a necessary reminder of the shortcomings of our discipline-ethnocentrism in anthropology. Similar attitudes and ideologies have prevented the study of certain lyrics (Gizycki 1971). It is striking that so many women are now working in the field. Concerning definitions, just one question: Is the anthropology of dance only "a four-field discipline"? Dutton (1977), for example, lists at least six schools and approaches in anthropology. Much as I see the point of integrating functionalist, structural, phenomenological, and comparative studies in a dynamic communication model, I miss, for instance, the historical perspective. In any case, a multidimensional approach may demand teamwork or cooperation at home and in the field.

Poetry being my field of study, I consider dance a specific form of artistic expression making use of body language. Dance to me is therefore part of an anthropology of art. In Tonga, for example, it is often, though by no means always, difficult to draw the line. A modern Tongan poet, composer, and choreographer (Helu 1978:22) explains: This unity of music, poetry and dance existed especially in the art of ancient Tonga. We cannot, however, regard this as a case of subordinating poetry to music, for the Tongan PUNAKE's (poet) conception of his art is quite different from that of his European counterpart. Because words are directly more meaningful than pure tone as instruments of communication, the Tongan PUNAKE made the poetry basic.... But as we have seen, Tongan poetry is music- oriented: it is always intended to be sung or chanted, and often to be danced as well.

It would probably be worthwhile to test the model proposed not only with play and ritual, but also with poetry and song: verbal creativity as well as dancing have their "grammar," their "text and context," their cultural patterning, their social and religious meaning, their aesthetic qualities apart from the specific problems of their media of expression; they have in common the fundamental questions they raise-who does what why and for whom?

In conclusion, one more practical point: Recently I was able to see a variety of dance performances in the South Pacific, some really beautiful, others totally commercialized. The de- structive effects of tourist expectations as feedback were a sad experience. Are anthropological students of dance aware of the

fact that while they are developing a more or less comprehensive research tool their subject is vanishing fast? That the dance at the core of traditional society is being forgotten, distorted, misused, sold out, or, at best, incorporated into national folklore (as in the Soviet Union, Yugoslavia, or Spain)? A teacher in Fiji (well versed in European ballet) told me how much it hurt her to see the beautiful village dancing being used as hotel entertainment. Some of Tongan dance is still alive. How can it survive in a rapidly changing modern world, and what can anthropologists do to help the people to preserve and recover their cultural heritage? (Some Samoan Catholic clergymen have in fact applied for help with docu- mentation.) Dance as a complex and beautiful means of human expression has come down to a pretty one-dimensional amuse- ment in our Anglo-European world. In my opinion, the theory proposed could and should be considered a contribution to our awareness of the humanistic value of art.

by PAUL HEYER and ALAN SHAPIRO Department of Communication, Simon Fraser University, Burnaby, B.C., Canada V5A 1S6. 14 ix 78

Not only is there overspecialization in anthropology, but this tendency now characterizes its subfields. It is therefore refreshing to see the author attempt a holistic approach. Her strategy is Tylorian and Boasian in that she acknowledges the importance of the four-field perspective but does not come to grips with a synthesis. Although the model is not integrative, we must remember that dance, unlike, e.g., social organization or religion, is only just beginning to receive serious anthropological consideration. In the history of the discipline dance has not gone unmentioned; however, definitive analyses are lacking. We recall Whorf's (1971[1956]) brief comparison of the conceptual structure of Hopi language and culture and the patterning of ceremonial dance. It is unfortunate that he did not elect to extend and elaborate this fascinating line of inquiry.

Despite the multifaceted approach, the author is inclined toward what can be referred to as a cultural account of dance. While such a species-specific model can illuminate structure and function, the equally important question of origins necessi- tates a more phylogenetic view. The work of Darwin (1962[1872]) and contemporary ethology comparatively examining the bio- genetic basis of ritual movement should be brought into any comprehensive modern study of dance. True, it is safe to say that only humans perpetuate certain movements for recreative activity such as dance, but it must be remembered that for animals, including humans, recreative activity holds no mo- nopoly on movement habits-how the latter influence and are selected by the former could be an area of fruitful research.

The author tends to use the term "communication" to signify intent to communicate-probably a phenomenological bias. The power of nonverbal expression, however, sometimes resides in the fact that species-mediated movement habits can bypass intentionality. Our prejudices notwithstanding, Hanna has given the discipline a useful map of the subject. What remains is to explore in more detail the numerous possible approaches she outlines and to cultivate an exchange relationship among them.

by YOSHIHIKO IKEGAMI Department of Foreign Languages, College of General Education, University of Tokyo, Komaba, Meguro, Tokyo, Japan 153. 31 viii 78

Whorf (1971[1956]) describes Western dancing as "delight in motion" and contrasts it with Hopi dancing, which is "highly symbolic ..,. but has not much movement or swing." His characterization of Hopi dancing seems to apply well to traditional Japanese dancing. In Western dancing the dancer is fully an agent, while in traditional Japanese (as well as Hopi)




Hanna: ANTHROPOLOGICAL STUDY OF DANCE dancing the dancer is simply a "location" at which a dance event happens or a "means" through which a symbolic meaning manifests itself.

Whorf elsewhere contrasts the Standard Average European image of motion as "kinematic" with the Hopi image of motion as "dynamic." From the viewpoint of the "localistic" hypothesis (i.e., the hypothesis that structural patterns for linguistically representing a change in locus are transferred to represent more abstract types of change, such as a change in possessorship or in state), this characterization correlates rather well with the two types of dancing just mentioned. In a kinematic motion (e.g., running, climbing, flying, swimming), a discrete object changes its location over time; in a dynamic motion (e.g., swelling, spreading, undulating), the moving part is not separated from the rest. The former is a change in locus, while the latter is almost a change in state. I have already noted that Western dancing is typically an agent-initiated motion, while the other type of dancing is impersonal; what we have here is almost a change in state rather than an agent-initiated motion.

This dichotomy further correlates with the typological distinction between what I call "do-languages" and "become-languages" (Ikegami 1977-78, n.d. a,b). A do-language is a language in which the focus is upon the agent; the agent is typically represented as the subject of the sentence and the rest of the sentence is grammatically structured in accordance with it. A become-language, on the other hand, is one in which an event is taken as a whole and the agent tends to be submerged in it (the agent may even be represented as no more than a location at which an event takes place). The former prefers personal and "active" constructions (who does what) and the latter impersonal and "passive" ones (what comes to pass). Similar distinctions have been noted by a number of linguists: e.g., "Tat" vs. "Empfindung" (Finck), "tdtig" vs. "leidend" (Cassirer), "Tdtigkeit" vs. "Vorgdnge an sick" (P. Hartmann), "actor- action" vs. "eventing" (Whorf), "das menschliche Ich" vs "Kraftvorgang" (H. Hartmann), "l'orientation par rapport aux participants" vs. "l'action elle-meme" (Martinet), "Tdterab- hdngig" vs. "Geschehen selbst" (Weisgerber).

Leaving the sphere of language, one would be tempted to see a dichotomy of the same type in such contrasting cultural types as "synthetic" vs. "analytic" thinking, "assertive" vs. "non- assertive" behavior, "man-oriented" vs. "nature-oriented" philosophy, "individualistic" vs. "holistic" social organization, "monotheistic" vs. "pantheistic" religion, and so forth.

How far we can go with such dichotomy remains to be seen. One thing, however, is clear in the present context: consideration of typological differences within dance offers a way of overcoming an unnecessarily strong opposition between uni- versalism and relativism in the anthropological description of culture.

Hanna refers to my article in Semiotica as an analysis of "a single Indian classical-dance hand gesture." It is in fact a "generative" description (i.e., one purporting to describe all possible semiotic elements that go toward making the hand gestures in classical Indian dancing meaningful) a la stratificational grammar.

by ADRIENNE L. KAEPPLER Bishop Museum, Box 6037, Honolulu, Hawaii 96818, U.S.A. 31 viii 78

Although this is a timely article, I feel that Hanna's jargon-filled contribution elucidates neither the history nor the problems of the anthropological study of dance. Unfortunately, the "model" presented is not sufficiently clear for one to understand it or its implications-let alone use it. Her frequent practice of citing the works of various writers at the end of or within one of her own sentences without fully explaining their relevance to her point is disconcerting. Often one does not know whether she is

agreeing or disagreeing or borrowing a concept or frame of reference. The cavalier treatment of the works of other dance scholars, both past and present, is astonishing. Fortunately, as only one of my articles is cited, I am spared most of this superficiality. Apparently, however, Hanna does not understand Kaeppler (1972), for my work was done using contrastive analysis as used in linguistics rather than by the method she imagines.

For an alternate view of dance in anthropological perspective, the reader is referred to Kaeppler (1978).

by JOANN W. KEALIINOHOMOKU CU Box 15200, Department of Anthropology, Northern Arizona University, Flagstaff, Ariz. 86011, U.S.A. 11 ix 78

Kurath wrote her landmark article "Panorama of Dance Ethnology" for CA in 1960, and the time is overripe for another dance article in CA. Hanna's article, however, is not Kurath updated. Kurath surveyed work done and work yet to be done. She was thorough, objective, and sympathetic. She charged scholars in such an effective manner that her article has continually inspired those who would research dance. I would guess that Kurath's 1960 article has been cited in dance literature more than any other single article.

Hanna's article, in contrast, selects out of context portions of the dance literature to set the stage for her own work. The setting is flawed for many reasons. The real value of her article emerges in the last half with the analyses of her own fieldwork with the Ubakala.

The flaws of the first half should be discussed in depth, since it seems likely that Hanna's article will be read throughout the world, but I will address three only: her analysis of the work of anthropologists who were not dance-oriented, her presentation of my work, and a few inconsistencies.

Hanna holds that past inadequate dance studies were caused by Western puritanical attitudes toward the body. She reports that anthropologists referred to dance as "lewd ambling" and "imitative fornication." I would be interested in knowing which anthropologists used such terminology. A second reason suggested for the dearth of dance research is that researchers "rationalized the neglect of dance study on the ground it was not subject to notation and recording." Many anthropologists were interested in dance, however, although clearly their research was not concerned with the things with which we are concerned today. Who can justifiably fault scholars for not being more sophisticated than their time warranted? Boas himself was interested in dance in British Columbia. He planiied to analyze dance, as Mead (1966:405-6) makes clear, but his work was thwarted by the 1930 theft of his dance films (p. 559). We can wonder what might have been the state of the discipline today if that unfortunate event had not occurred.

Hanna faults extant definitions of dance. She cites my definitions of the '60s and early '70s but ignores my discussion of definitions in 1976. She translates my term "affective mode of expression" to read "expressing emotion," which was not my intent. She clearly does not understand my use of the words "redundant" and "musicality." She prefers "ephemeral" to my "transient." Her discussion of dance definitions seems reduced to choosing the right words. I now use my definitions of dance, as quoted by Hanna, as preliminary working definitions only. She would know that if she had studied my dissertation.

I will focus briefly on a few inconsistencies in various other arguments. Hanna lists four criteria for dance, but goes on to add several others. One of these is what she calls "nonverbal body movements." Is there such a thing as a verbal body movement? She insists that dance must include "an intent to communicate" and that "dance is communicative behavior." Why is the criterion of communication essential, since all human

Vol. 20 - No. 2 * June 1979 327



body movements communicate body language to willing re- ceptors (such as fieldworkers)? An intent to communicate is a different question. Using her example of the Iroquois women's "Dark Dance," one can ask for whom these dancers perform and whether there is an intent to communicate here? If the dancers do not intend to communicate, is their dance not a dance?

Again, Hanna writes that "humans are multisensory. Occa- sionally, they verbalize and listen; more often, they act and watch or feel." How does she know? If there is such a prefer- ence among some groups of people, might it not be culturally induced? There is some evidence that some depend more on auditory than on visual input; traditional Hawaiian dance was more sound-oriented than visually oriented.

These, and other, problems of Hanna's work are not new. Some of us who are studying the anthropology of dance have questioned her ideas before. Hanna's response is to repeat herself, as an English-speaking person says the same thing louder and louder to a Spanish-speaking person who does not understand, rather than to try to find other ways to communicate.

by GERHARD KUBIK IUAES Commission for Urgent Anthropological and Ethno- logical Research, Institut fuir Volkerkunde, Universitdt Wien, Universitdtsstrasse 7, A-1010 Vienna, Austria. 5 viii 78

Hanna's bibliography, though extensive, has an English-speaking bias; not a single work on dance research in a language other than English has been included.

I would find it useful if Hanna were to include references to recent work on the study of movement behaviour in the music/ dance of Black Africa and on systems of recording and notation of movement, especially from cinematographic shots, which have been developed on the basis of field experiences and involve some novel viewpoints on movement and its analysis. A few of these are Dauer (1967, 1969), Gunther (1969), Kubik (1972, 1973, 1975, 1977), and Rouget (1965).

Incidentally, the rigid distinction between "music" and "dance" is a Western one, and Hanna's definition of "dance" may not be shared by other peoples of the world. For this reason, her criticism of Blacking seems to me irrelevant.

by RODERYK LANGE Centre for Dance Studies, Les Bois, St. Peter, Jersey, Channel Islands, Great Britain. 4 ix 78

The author says: "A summary of the field will provide a context for the presentation." One would expect her article to offer a worldwide chronological review of major works. This is not the case. There is a suggestion that it may be confined to Anglo-Saxon culture, but even this is not true. In fact, it is confined mainly to America. The European contribution to the growth of the anthropology of dance is simply ignored, along with any historical approach.

The latter part of the 19th century is characterized as the gestation period for the discipline. The list of contributors to the anthropological study of dance starts with Grosse (1909). In fact, in Europe it started with the Encyclopaedia Britannica (1788-97), A. Smith's Essays on Philosophical Subjects (1795), H. Spencer's On the Origin of Dancing (1895), Dancer and Musician (1895), and others.

Sachs's work is considered to have been published in 1937. In fact, it appeared in 1933, in German; this is important because the English translation of 1937 does not do justice to the original. Sachs relied on the sources and methods available at the time. The criticism of his work by Kealiinohomoku does not respect this fact and is at its best iconoclastic. Younger- man's critique, however, cannot be taken seriously. Criticisms of previous solutions are certainly necessary, but attacks are

unsavoury, particularly when the author is dead and cannot defend himself.

Boas held seminars on dance in 1942, not 1944. Laban's Choreutics first appeared not in 1974, but in 1966 in England. His statement about choreology as the science of movement syntax had already appeared in his Choreographie (1926), Mastery of Movement (1950), and Principles of Dance and Movement Notation (1956).

Structural studies based on musicological methods in fact began much earlier than the author suggests: see Harasym- czuk (1939) and Szentpal (1957, 1958).

Comparative studies in Europe are not mentioned: see Hoer- burger (e.g., 1956), Laudova (e.g., 1963), and Lange (e.g., 1964).

It is true that systems of movement notation have existed for hundreds of years, but there was until 1928 (with the Laban system) no equivalent of phonetic writing. This system is of course combined with a corresponding type of movement analysis. Its lack undoubtedly hampered any development in dance research; this needs to be explicitly stressed. The full graphic notation contains much more than "the physical description of movement." It also conveys the meanings embodied in dance movement, which result from the movement context and may include "socially significant implicit behaviour." Also, it is understood in any sound research work on dance that sufficient data are collected to permit the identification of the meaning of dance within a given sociocultural context. What is encoded may be only facts already contained in the material collected.

Laban certainly did not overgeneralise his movement concepts. He considered them merely a frame of reference to which one relates any concrete occurrence of human movement in identifying it. There are no "emotion and movement" concepts for Laban; this is a misunderstanding (see, e.g., Laban and Lawrence 1947). Finally, Laban's concepts certainly do not contain the notion of six dimensions; instead, they are based on the universal three dimensions in space. The remaining information concerning Laban's concepts is equally unsound.

by ANYA PETERSON ROYCE Department of Anthropology, Indiana University, Blooming- ton, Ind. 47401, U.S.A. 12 ix 78

A large portion of Hanna's article is devoted to a review of the anthropology of dance. Even so, it fails to present more than a cursory discussion. Anyone not already familiar with the extensive literature and the debates will find it incomplete, contradictory, and misleading. Readers interested in an introduction should consult Hanna (1979a), Kealiinohomoku (1976), Kurath (1960), Merriam (1974), or Royce (1974a, 1977).

Linguistics, for example, is treated with some regard for the diversity of approaches within it. Ethnology, in contrast, is divided into social and cultural anthropology, after which Hanna turns to a discussion of the contributions of cultural ecology. One looks in vain for the equally pertinent areas of political anthropology, social organization and structure, symbolic anthropology, and psychological anthropology. Or should one conclude that cultural ecology is the only specialty with theoretical implications for the study of dance? Further, in the section on comiparative studies, where are Bourguignon (1968), Hall (1968), Kurath (1956b), Royce (1977), and Saldafia (1966)? There are few enough comparative studies that one can surely list them all, especially in light of the extensive manner in which Hanna treats structural studies. If one is not going to discuss all the literature, then one might refer the reader to relevant sources. In the section on functionalist studies, Hanna might have cited Shay (1971), who provides an extensive bibliography.

The review is also marred by Hanna's tendency to set up straw men simply to knock them down. For example, in re-




Hanna: ANTHROPOLOGTCAL STUDY OF DANCE jecting the term "dance ethnology," Hanna quotes Kurath's (1960:235) use of "ethnic dance" in this connection. She ne- glects to mention Kurath's statement later in the same article (p. 250) that "any dichotomy between ethnic dance and art dance dissolves if one regards dance ethnology, not as a description or reproduction of a particular kind of dance, but as an approach toward, and a method of, eliciting the place of dance in human life-in a word, as a branch of anthropology." Similarly, Hanna's criticism of Kealiinohomoku's (1969-70) definition of dance is gratuitous, for her criticisms are met by Kealiinohomoku's revised definition (1972).

More serious is Hanna's quibble with Kurath's definition of dance, specifically Kurath's phrase "with a purpose transcending utility." Hanna argues that many dances serve functions and therefore have utility. I would go even farther to say that all dances serve some function, but that is not the issue. Ku- rath's sentence (pp. 234-35, emphasis mine) reads in full: "Out of ordinary motor activities dance selects, heightens or subdues, juggles gestures and steps to achieve a pattern, and does this with a purpose transcending utility." As I understand Kurath, she is referring to the dance movement, not the dance context. Dance movement, in other words, transcends utility in that it is not movement performed to hollow out a canoe or to win a swimming contest. The movement itself has no inherent utility except, of course, that some dance movements are necessary for other dance movements. Thus one may speak of the "utility" of bending the knees as in a demi-plie only in the sense that one has to bend the knees in order to jump off of and return to the ground.

This interpretation by Hanna of Kurath's definition is of a piece with the model she proposes. Hanna might be commend- ed for her attempt to present a dynamic, synthesizing model. Scholars confronted with such a complex phenomenon as dance risk focusing on isolated aspects and losing sight of the whole; to use Hanna's phrase, they produce partial studies. Hanna herself, however, demonstrates a singular unconcern for the description and analysis of dance form. The model apparently emphasizes how dance "works" (to use Hanna's words) at the expense of knowing precisely what dance "is." This emphasis undermines the holistic study of dance from an anthropological perspective. New directions in the study of dance point toward structural analysis and, based on that, toward studies of communication, aesthetics, and meaning (Royce 1977). Structural analysis and, hence, the rest of the edifice require a firm foundation in description of dance movement. (For an outstanding example of such- description, see Kaeppler 1967.) Hanna is quite correct in saying that we must be concerned with what dance movements signify, but surely this should not be at the expense of knowing the precise form of the movements themselves. The contradiction between what Hanna says and what her model seems to propose makes particularly irritating her statement that narrow theoretical approaches have blinded researchers to the fact that dance can be significant in its own right. If one truly believes in the significance of dance qua dance, how can one ignore the description of dance movement?

Models are useful only insofar as they inform or guide research and aid in explanation. Thus far, Hanna's model is of heuristic value. Only when it has been tested by application in a variety of field situations will we be able to assess its capabilities.

by JILL DRAYSON SWEET Department of Anthropology, University of New Mexico, Albuquerque, N.M. 87131, U.S.A. 9 VIII 78

Hanna's article is the most comprehensive and thoughtful review of the anthropology of dance to date. She makes a strong

case for dance research as an important area of investigation within anthropology and suggests insightful and dynamic approaches to movement studies. With a few exceptions, I find myself in agreement with what she says.

One of the most important ideas underlying Hanna's article is that dance is not merely a reflection of social behavior, but actively contributes towards shaping that behavior. This is clear from her frequent references to Ubakala dance, which can be seen as "communicating world view, ordering social relations, enacting social drama, mediating paradoxes, and introducing change." It is this dynamic approach to dance that makes Hanna's processual model a valuable conceptual tool for the researcher. It is also this approach that can take the dance anthropologist beyond the static and functional studies which invariably conclude that a particular dance contributes to the social solidarity of the group, reflects the social order, or portrays a particular mythic or legendary story.

When Hanna examines the four major subfields of anthropology, it becomes apparent what each area can offer the dance anthropologist. She could have pointed out more clearly, however, what the dance anthropologist can contribute to each of these areas. Only when these contributions are recognized will the dance anthropologist be included in anthropological teams in the field or consulted by other social scientists working on problems related to movement and dance events.

Hanna's concern for definition is symptomatic of the youth of our subdiscipline. It is a necessary concern, but all definitions should be viewed as transitory signposts providing the investigator with some temporary conceptual boundaries. While the definition of dance offered by Hanna is probably one of the most useful, it has some problems and will most likely become obsolete when we better understand the role of dance in a wider diversity of societies. The problems I perceive in Hanna's definition are not major, but merit consideration.

First, the phrase "aesthetic value" is subject to abuse, since it can serve as an ethnocentric filter for data and may be mis- understood by the lay reader. Second, Kealiinohomoku's concern for the native point of view in defining dance should not be dismissed, because comparative generalizations can only be made after specific native interpretations have been thoroughly examined. Next, "nonverbal" is not always a correct way to characterize dance, since some cultural groups will not con- ceptually separate dance from poetry or song. An example of this is found in the traditional Maori action songs. Finally, although Hanna states that "dance is a system of signs [and] symbolic action," no aspect of her formal definition stresses this important characteristic.

It is my own hope that dance anthropologists will take a careful look at Hanna's paper and experiment with the semantic grid and processual model she has devised. It was evident at the most recent Congress on Research in Dance, held in Honolulu in August 1978, that too many dance studies are still purely descriptive. Dance researchers need to look more closely at anthropological theory and method and explore some of the directions suggested by Hanna.

Hanna has performed a timely and significant service in helping to solidify the professional identity of a young subdiscipline. Perhaps now anthropologists studying dance can stop expending their energy on justifying the existence of the anthropology of dance and put to rest the questions of why dance has been neglected and why it is an important subject for the student of culture. It is time for dance anthropologists, like other anthropologists, to concentrate on the task of making meaningful and insightful contributions to our understanding of human behavior.

Vol. 20 * No. 2 * June 1979 329



by STEPHEN A. WILD Australian Institute of Aboriginal Studies, P.O. Box 553, Can- berra City, A.C.T. 2601, Australia. 21 xi 78

Hanna's paper is a salutary contribution to the broadening of dance studies to encompass the whole discipline of anthropology. Its importance lies in the demonstration that the study of dance has much to offer anthropology and that anthropology has much to offer the study of dance. Any difficulty in understanding the model is the fault of the model and not attribut- able to ignorance of the concepts or analytical deficiencies on the part of anthropologists who have kept abreast of developments in the field. Lack of emphasis on notation and technical discussion of dance movements is a strength of the paper, which deals with broader issues of dance as a cultural phenomenon. Anthropology has much to gain from the analysis of highly formalized behavior, using and developing its own conceptual and methodological resources. The reasons adduced by Hanna for the neglect of dance research in anthropology are well taken, but they do not explain the neglect of other, similar forms of expression (music, drama, oral performance) with which it is linked. Studying temporal forms of expression is difficult because they are both interactional and highly formalized. De- scriptive conventions are inadequate and too often a device for mystification. As anthropology has developed new ways of analyzing economics, politics, and society, so it can develop new ways of dealing with dance, drama, music, and oral performance. It only requires resourcefulness and a holistic and universal perspective.

The approach Hanna proposes is rather more generalist than is the trend in current anthropology. On the other hand, the model is too fine-grained for a general model and not fine- grained enough for specific studies. It is a programmatic statement characteristic of the initial stage of a field of study (e.g., for ethnomusicology, see Merriam 1964). The success of this stage will be measured by the anachronism of this and other models in ten years' time. It should be read not as a blueprint for future research, but as a basis for generating discussion and research ideas. Such programmatic statements are useful and necessary.

Some more specific weaknesses of Hanna's paper should be mentioned. Hanna comments on Williams's definition of dance, which includes the quality of being "visually apprehended," that "a person may dance in the absence of an observer." The comment contradicts Hanna's use of a communication model, which implies a receiver as well as a sender. Dance is perhaps not necessarily "visually" apprehended, but in the context of a communication model it is certainly apprehended, even if only by another dancer. "Aesthetic" implies more than "notions of appropriateness and competency." It implies this merely by being cultural. If dance has aesthetic value in a culture, it is tied up with the notion of "art," with an articulated philosophy and evaluative criteria by which the quality of art forms (as art) is judged. Whether or not dance has aesthetic value in a culture requires investigation. One of the weaknesses of a semiotic model is that it tends to obscure such important subjects in attempting to be an adequate model for all forms of communication in all cultures. Another weakness is its jargon for im- precise categories. For example, in Hanna's model, "catalyst" runs the gamut from a festival to a moonlit night! "Selective perception" does not seem to be significantly different from "catalyst," since it includes "fear of shame," "pleasure," and "social approval." These technical-sounding terms turn out to be no more precise designations than "reasons for performance." Under "feedback" has to be taken into account everything which may modify a performance, from aesthetic evaluation to the presence of a loose animal. Some judgments of significance are obviously necessary, and the model doesn't help.

Reply by JUDITH LYNNE HANNA

College Park, Md. 20742, U.S.A. 28 xi 78 CURRENT ANTHROPOLOGY serves an important function in pro- moting an exchange of ideas among scholars of differing views. This opportunity for serious dialogue on substantive issues is particularly valuable in a relatively new social science specialization. Dance, a prominent domain in communication, ritual, play, and the arts, is not given the attention other human phenomena receive in handbooks, encyclopaedias, texts, etc. Con- structive criticism that points out weaknesses, omissions, and other shortcomings, as well as proposes ways to deal with these, leads to progress: old mistakes can be avoided in future work, a specialization can grow and rise above suppressive factional- ism, and a sound foundation can ultimately generate causal or transformational laws. I appreciate my colleagues' thoughtful and constructive commentaries on the issues my paper addresses.

Validating the relevance of dance within the four fields of anthropology are the varying comments offered here by scholars of different academic ancestries. The specialization of anthropology and dance is surely one of multilineal evolution. Thus Ikegami, Heyer, and Shapiro refer to the early contributions of Whorf, which do not appear in reviews or summaries of the specialization by ethnomusicologists or by Kurath's fol- lowers, who combine dance knowledge and performance with anthropology. Certainly there is a need for ethnographers and other scholars studying dance to pool their findings if anthropology is to be a generalizing, cross-cultural social science.'

The comments appear to fall into these broad categories: (1) the contribution of research on dance to anthropology as a social science, (2) the definition of dance, (3) model considerations, and (4) the history and problems of the anthropological study of dance. I will take up each of these.

Contribution of research on dance to anthropology as a social science. Scholars trained in dancing who have performed and analyzed movement, especially those who have used notations such as Labanotation (see Higgins 1977 for a valuable approach that is more compatible with physical anthropology), have conveyed to many social scientists the image of an irrelevant, esoteric cult. This is a universe-of-discourse problem linked with prejudice as well as a gap in dance research communication. It is necessary to do more than declare by fiat the importance of dance and describe what has been done in order to achieve parity with other specializations.

Sweet rightly challenges researchers to point out more clearly the contributions of dance studies to each of the four major subfields of anthropology. Such clarification will link dance to social theory and make dance known to social scientists generally. As Sweet points out, "Only when these contributions are recognized will the dance anthropologist be included in anthropological teams in the field or consulted by other social scientists working on problems related to movement and dance events." The willingness to recognize and the willingness to be recognized are mutually reinforcing.

An example of the dance-social science link is the semantic grid I have evolved in the process of analyzing dance data; it is relevant to a number of contemporary research problems in semantics, cross-cultural cognitive processes, the ontogenetic development of symbolization and the transmission of encoding and decoding processes, the "split-brain" phenomenon, and ritualization.

1 Adequate library resources are not yet available in one place, in spite of a fine developing dance collection at the New York Public Library's Lincoln Center Library for the Performing Arts. The United States Library of Congress has collections or sections on visual arts, verbal and literary arts, and music, but none on dance.




Hanna: ANTHROPOLOGICAL STUDY OF DANCE Part of the difficulty in linking the contribution of dance research to social science may be that some anthropologists studying dance have devoted more attention to convincing people in the field of dance, undergraduates, and lay people that the anthropological perspective is important than to relating their work to the theories and methods of anthropological colleagues studying other significant aspects of human thought and behavior. The references in some of the reviews of the anthropological study of dance suggest an imbalance of dance literature over dance-social science literature. The former has not generally enlightened us about non-Western people and their dances.

As Comitas and Dolgin (1978:173) put it in describing the anthropological study of education, the present state of the specialization "can best be described as ethnographic, a growing corpus of rich, descriptive literature with only limited links to theory. If the specialization is to be effective and useful, it must develop on systematic theoretical foundations." Re- searchers describe phenomena with categories established on the basis of preconceptions and experience. The literature on the anthropology of dance, like that of other specializations, has tended not to justify critically the check-list categories or to show their interrelationships.

Related to the issue of contributions of dance research to the field of anthropology is what the specialization should be called. Royce implies I do Kurath an injustice by rejecting "dance ethnology" as a name for the anthropological study of dance by quoting her use of ethnic dance but not her further statement that the dichotomy between ethnic dance and art dance dissolves if one regards dance ethnology as "an approach toward, and method of, eliciting the place of dance in human life." While I share Kurath's view, the concept of the anthropology of dance takes in the four fields of the discipline, whereas dance ethnology implies cultural anthropology and a narrower focus. Furthermore, since Kurath's 1960 article, "dance ethnology" has been used to refer to the study of ethnic dance, excluding the study of Western theater dance using anthropological theory and method, in dance departments without professional anthropologists. The research does not contribute to the field of anthropology, i.e., what dance tells us about human thought, action, and organization, for the reasons Williams (1976-77b) points out: its ethnocentrism, unnoticed because many people share it; its naive assumptions of the universality of movement; and the distorted verbal accounts that arise from an unawareness of the complexity and ambiguity of language.

The definition of dance. Several commentators address the criteria for a definition of dance. Unfortunately, an extensive discussion of a working definition I originally presented at the IXth International Congress of Anthropological and Ethnologi- cal Sciences in 1973 is still in press (Hanna 1979a, b). Defining an activity in order to indicate the sets of features which are referents for a concept and at the same time remaining flexible about empirical issues are important for delimiting an area of study (cf. Devons and Gluckman 1964) with the aim of identifying, describing, and explaining interspecies and cultural similarities and differences. Kealiinohomoku notes that my discussion of dance definitions "seems reduced to choosing the right words." As I understand rigid or preliminary working definitions, this is requisite and explains why our scientific dic- tionaries are continually revised in accordance with current theory and research.

Abrahams asks how the definition was derived. Since I am a Westerner, Western notions obviously figure in the calculus. In addition, however, more than 15 years of cross-cultural dance observation, experience, eliciting informant specifications, surveying the ethnographic and dance literature, and considering dance-movement elements and the instrument of dance contribute to an inductively derived synthesis of what appear to be the core components of the phenomenon.

I agree with Crumrine that many forms of dance appear to be integrally associated with ideas of power and with transformations which either confer power or demonstrate its presence. Elsewhere (1975, 1976a, 1978, 1979a) I have discussed relationships of dance to power over self and others in terms of dance as symbolic of power relations and actual political strategy: the validation and re-creation of leadership, competi- tion for power, social control, coping with subordination or its threat, constraints on the exercise of power, and redress and transformation. Dance is power, the manifestation of the interaction of four sources of force-mental energy, muscle strength, the force of gravity, and the momentum developed in the moving body or any of its parts. Because sexual intercourse is seen to be life generating, the body is equated with potency, and this potency is often taken as a symbol for efficacy in general. Thus we can see that one's body, an object of viewing or instrument of expression, communication, and other action, becomes an important experiential context which introduces order and meaning into one's relations with others. Although the purpose of dance is often the pursuit or exercise of power, some dancers convey powerlessness, as in the dying swan, and some merely play with form. Therefore, I hesitate to include power as part of a cross-cultural definition.

Royce considers my disagreement as to "a purpose transcending utility" a misreading of Kurath. She understands Kurath to refer to the dance movement, not the context. Move- ments, however, may have a purpose, as Crumrine suggests above and as Nadel (1942:254-55) does in this illustration: Nupe women in Nigeria prepare a hut floor during a work dance. On one hand, the floor could be prepared more efficiently without the dance, with its stylized, aesthetic, affective movement. On the other hand, the dance could be performed without preparing the floor. The center of interest appears to be the process, and the dance apparently motivates and sustains the task.

Royce suggests that my criticism of two aspects of Kealiino- homoku's 1969 definition has been met by the latter's 1972 revision, but I have discussed and raised questions about this "refinement" as well. One such question had to do with the link she sees between dance and musicality. Kaeppler (1978:33) similarly argues that "in many ways, dance is simply part of music, to which it is integrally related." As I have pointed out, some groups dance without any music. Perhaps music is linked to the definitive features of dance-or perhaps the human psychobiological bases of rhythm and creativity generate both. Movements occur before sounds in human ontogeny. Thus, while I agree with Kubik that many peoples do not distinguish between music and dance, others do, and a cross-cultural concept of dance cannot be restricted to movement with music.

Kealiinohomoku asks, "Is there such a thing as a verbal body movement?" The sound-making of speech and singing involves articulatory movements in the chest, throat, mouth, and nose.

I do not insist that dance include "an intent to communicate." As I have pointed out, a dancer may intend to communicate; however, a dancer may also transmit information (cf. MacKay 1972; Wiener et al. 1972; LaFrance and Mayo 1978:2) without intending to do so.

Kealiinohomoku asks how I know that people occasionally verbalize and listen but more often act and watch or feel. Ob- servations of a variety of people and ethnographies are important sources of data. LaFrance and Mayo (1978) present an account of the relevant work on the various channels of communication.

I share Sweet's concern that the phrase "aesthetic value" in my working definition is subject to abuse. Including "from the dancer's perspective" in the definition and defining "aesthetic"

Vol. 20 * No. 2 * June 1979 331



in terms of notions of appropriateness and competency may moderate ethnocentrism. The native point of view in defining dance is by no means dismissed. Elsewhere I point out the need to consider the integrity of a group's categories. If comparison is the goal, however, the anthropologist may study behavior that is not named dance or behavior that is only part of what a people includes within its term for dance. (The Tiv, for example, use the same word for dance and gambling.) In my definition the semantic, symbolic aspects of dance are subsumed by criteria of purposefulness and aesthetics (Hanna 1979a, b, 1977b).

Wild faults my limiting "aesthetic" to notions of appropriateness and competency. However, I am wary of imposing the Western concepts of art and aesthetics. Just as individuals can smell smoke and respond appropriately without an articulated philosophy about smoke and fire, so too may they have evaluative criteria without an articulated philosophy.

I agree with Wild that, if dance is viewed in terms of a communication model, it must be apprehended and it is usually interpersonal. However, a person dancing alone may be both sender and receiver or audience. Sometimes a Western dancer will use a mirror; at other times apprehension may occur through the sounds of moving and breathing, the smells of physical exertion, and kinesthesia. The dancer becomes an audience to him or herself, i.e., the superego may stand for another person or group. The private solo dance is similar to what Dewey (1922:171) called the inner dialogue or soliloquy, seem- ingly locked within the self, but the "product and reflection of converse with others"; "if we had not talked with others and they with us, we should never talk to and with ourselves."

Abrahams offers a definition from what he calls a "folkloristic" perspective. What is distinctly folkloristic about his perspective is unclear. Many anthropologists, myself included, study folklore as part of cultural anthropology. Abrahams's formulation of dance is generally compatible with mine. His "self-consciously stylized behaviors embodied in framed events or enactments" are similar to my purposeful, culturally patterned nonverbal movements which are extraordinary. Because dance is extraordinary, it is an attention-getting device, ar- resting and seductive. This quality of dance sets up a frame within which images can be scrutinized and played with. As a frame for public reflexivity, dance may both reflect and influence social structures, values, and roles. Abrahams's statement that the order of movements "invites participation," however, warrants an explanation of how. "Regularity of pulse" also needs clarification, since some folk and Western dance music is characterized by irregularity of pulse. Regarding dancing as "a set of movements with a sense of beginning and ending," as Abrahams proposes, does not seem to distinguish it from most other socially and culturally patterned behaviors, such as lovemaking and defecating.

The researcher's problem of determining when an activity is dancing is sometimes difficult-indeed, requires an ethnography. Many behaviors do not fit into neat slots. Forms may merge, separate, and/or recombine. Western ice-skating or gymnastics choreographed by a member of the American Ballet Theater could be viewed as a special genre of dance. John Curry combines ballet and ice-skating, working with such choreographers as John Butler, Kenneth Macmillan, and Peter Martins. Some Afro-American children's movements about a classroom could also be considered a dance genre. Work and dance may interweave; so may politics and dance (cf. Swift 1968, Copeland 1978, Goldfarb 1978). It seems likely that when movement is physically utilitarian, it may be considered dance if other, more efficient physical means to utilitarian ends are available and not chosen.

Model considerations. Gizycki is correct that the historical perspective is important in the study of dance. The four fields of anthropology include diachronic studies in comparative work

and research on culture change. Heyer and Shapiro point out an oversight: a phylogenetic view (Hanna 1977b, 1979a) should be a part of the model. Where the box in figure 1 entitled "Cata- lyst" has "Confluence of Environmental and Sociocultural Elements," it should have "Phylogenetic, Historical, Individu- al, Sociocultural, and/or Physical Elements." Unfortunately, I was unable to collect historical material on the Ubakala dance- plays.

Since dance emerges from an evolutionary process lasting millions of years, we look for presages found in other animals and in infants. Elsewhere (1977b, 1979a) I have suggested what appear to be the major distinctions between human and nonhuman uses of ritual movements. Although nonhuman primates carry the seeds of the visual, motor, auditory, kinesthetic, affective, and cognitive patterns that are more fully developed in humans, certain capacities incipient in nonhumans are realized only in humans. Differences occur in symbolization (the semantic grid, with its different devices and spheres of encoding messages, suggests the range and complexity of symbolic capability); furthermore, humans can "fossilize" or capture the motor patterns through objectification in lithic, ceramic, or painted form or, more recently, in notation, film, or videotape. Differences also occur in emotional expression, range and control of movements, and ability to use syntactically novel forms without being trained in phrases of that form. The distinction between fixed action patterns and selected action patterns characteristic of humans is critical. The bases for these contrasts lie in the development of the human brain as well as the increased dependency and socialization of human offspring. What other animals communicate in motor patterns that ethologists call dances seems to involve immediate emotion and drive (for example, fear, hunger, well-being, aggression, reassurance, submission, and sexual arousal) and autonomic rhythms. Humans share these behaviors, but they can also deliberately express or withhold an experience and voluntarily communicate abstract concepts removed in time and space from an immediate stimulus through specifically chosen and self-controlled rhythms and movements. Table 2 summarizes some of the evolutionary distinctions.

Wild's statement that my approach is "more generalist than is the trend in current anthropology" may be a misreading of the inclinations of many anthropologists. For example, Bohan- nan (1978), as President of the American Anthropological As- sociation, notes the broad scope of the discipline and states that its main job is "determining the many ways that the many dimensions of human life can be fitted together.... Anthropol- ogy is an integrative and synthesizing discipline: it is, within itself, necessarily interdisciplinary." Of course, an individual cannot study everything at once, but a specialized research effort can be placed within an integrative framework so that anthropological work can be comparative and holistic.

Wild distinguishes among a programmatic statement, a direction for future research, and a basis for generating discussion. However, an alternate view is possible: a programmatic statement can generate discussion and provide direction for research. The empirical and theoretical implications then contribute to an evaluation and revision of the model.

Wild criticizes the model for what a model, by social science definition, is not. A model attempts to avoid particularistic focus or distortions in order to reduce the concrete complexity of data and delineate structure and processual patterning. Com- prising a metalanguage about a concrete phenomenon, a model points out significant elements at a general level. A model can be regarded as a visual aid for empirical observation, classification, and analysis. Since a model, by definition, does not include the "fine-grain" Wild says my model lacks for specific studies, I refer him to work elsewhere (Hanna 1976, 1978, 1979a, b) that can provide elaboration, application, and comments of finding significance-i.e., some fine-grain.




Hanna: ANTHROPOLOGICAL STUDY OF DANCE Taking issue with the choice of model categories, Wild mis- understands some significant distinctions. "Catalyst" does differ from "selective perception." The former may be an external event or process, whereas the latter is an individual's internal cognitive and emotional processes. This inner behavior permits choreographer-dancer and audience message encoding and decoding and aesthetic awareness.

Dirks addresses one of the fascinating unresearched questions: when and why the medium of dance comes into play. Scholars have speculated within a range of possibilities: lack of verbal expression, need for emphasis, participant pleasure, political efficacy, historical accident or determination, psychobiological basis.

Dirks's assumption that "human ritual, like the rituals of other animals, tends to evolve toward making information more conspicuous and less ambiguous" overlooks the symboliz- ing capability of humans and the efficacy of ambiguity in political and administrative settings to provide dominant individuals with more options. Fernandez (1965) provides another illustration of the use of ambiguity: by not specifying the meaning of their participation, dancers who have differing beliefs can enjoy the activity. Much humor, word play, music, visual art, and drama relies on multiple meanings for its attraction and stimulation.

I share Ikegami's view of the need to consider typological differences within dance as a way of identifying similarities and differences. The identification of various forms of encoding meaning (see fig. 1) is one approach. Elsewhere (1979a), I have proposed categorizations (table 3) in which I now include Ike- gami's important distinctions in participation action (agent initiated/agent acted upon) and movement transformation (change in place [spatial ground pattern]/change in state [body space without locomotion]). Rather than categorizing all West- ern dance in the "do" as opposed to the "become" category, it would be useful to think of continua. Western dance is varied even within the ballet genre. Balanchine as a choreographer "does" with his dancers (performers and creators in an inter-

pretive sense) and they become his instruments. They are dis- tinguishable from other ballet company dancers in their technical capabilities (Mazo 1974, Gouldner 1977-78). Many modern Western dancers have drawn upon the concepts and vocabu- laries of Eastern dance. Dances may have transformations during their unfolding. For example, a person may dance (active agent) to invite a spiritual possession, and at the point of inter- section of human and divine the person perceives the human self as acted upon. Similarly, a dance may combine or alternate what Ikegami calls kinematic and dynamic motions, movements from one place to another or movements in place.

Royce's faulting of the model for a "singular unconcern for the description and analysis of dance form" appears to be a confounding of the meaning of a model with methodology and technique. Readers are referred to a number of various approaches in my summary review. My concern with the importance of description and analysis of form accounts for the greater amount of attention devoted to structural2 than to other approaches. (Royce has questioned this imbalance.) Ap- pended are movement data categories derived from Laban's movement analyses and structural approaches that I found useful, and the model includes the word "syntax." To identify syntax requires a description and analysis of sequential patterns of movements, i.e., dance form. The thrust of the model is the interrelationship of text (movement) and context. I point out that in the Ubakala study an ideal performance model was developed from the movements of each performing group's leader for the description and analysis of style and structure- transformations from visual imagery on 16mm motion picture film-and I refer readers to the detailed movement transcript and analysis (Hanna 1976a). It is unclear why Royce writes,

2 Ikegami's comment with regard to my description of his 1971 work is well taken. My text should have read "analysis from" rather than "analysis of."

TABLE 2

COMPARISON OF DANCE AND NONVERBAL COMMUNICATION OF OTHER ANIMALS

DANCE NONHUMAN NONVERBAL COMMUNICAIION

Purpose .... ..... . Affective and cognitive motivation Social bonding, territoriality Courtship and mating Dominance-submission, reassurance, aggression Mostly displays Child care Exploratory behavior Coordination of actions from immediate and dis- Coordination of approach, withdrawal, following

tant context, assertion of continuity in defense in relatively immediate or limited context against threat of mortality

Expression, evocation, and transformation of Expression and evocation of emotion emotion

Multiple purposes Mostly directed toward food, fear, and sex moti- vational states

Rhythm.... Intentional, chosen in harmony with or counter to Not deliberately chosen psychobiologically based rhythms

Cultural patterning .... . .. Open (productive) system of movement, semantics, Limited intraspecies variation syntax

Complex movement, semantic, and syntactic sys- Relatively simple systems; response to relatively tems; modifiers and context important few simple perceptual cues, reactive motility

Learned, arbitrary forms Learning, but not of deliberately chosen forms Movements .Extraordinary Extraordinary

Of inherent value Of inherent value Possessing aesthetic value, notions of culturally Involving recognition of naturally based per-

based rules of performance formance Innate bases ....... . Motor gesture potential great Motor gesture potential limited

Cross-modal perception Cross-modal perception limited Cognitive generalizations Cognitive generalizations limited Memory Memory limited

Vol. 20 N No. 2 * June 1979 333



"New directions in the study of dance point toward structural analysis and, based on that, toward studies of communication, aesthetics, and meaning" and cites her 1977 introductory text, for in that work some past approaches are described (cf. Sweet 1978-79). Other issues. The contradictory views of the historical con-

tributions to the field of the anthropological study of dance stem in part from the interdisciplinary, multilineal descent pattern and strong traditions of ancestor honor. Some of the criticisms reflect a lineage that encompasses work focused on chronology and description outside a social science perspective. Another lineage traces its roots through the work of social and behavioral scientists-anthropologists, sociologists, psycholo- gists, linguists, and sociocultural historians. A third anthropological lineage is forgetful of some of its ancestors, perhaps in order to develop a new set of myths and rituals. Because the

TABLE 3 DANCE CLASSIFICATION CONSIDERATIONS

I. Typology based on aspects of participation A. Participant purpose

1. Social dance (social interaction primary) a) therapy (self or group working through problems) b) ethnic-folk c) second-existence folk d) popular (dominant culture in a heterogeneous setting)

2. Skill acquisition a) individual teacher b) class instruction

3. Theatrical performance of one or more dancers for an audience a) audience is distanced from dancer(s) b) audience has limited participation c) audience plays significant role

B. Participation recruitment pattern 1. Ascription 2. Achievement

C. Participation motivation 1. Required 2. Expected 3. Voluntary

D. Participation action 1. Dancer-initiated (doing) 2. Dancer acted upon (becoming)

II. Typology based on elements of movement and body emphasized A. Movement elements: space, rhythm, effort B. Body parts: head, torso, chest, shoulder, limbs, etc. C. Pattern of motion and pose and exhibition of intention

to move D. Movement transformation

1. Change in spatial ground pattern through locomotion (doing)

2. Change in body space/state through swelling, spreading, undulating (becoming)

III. Genetic classification A. New creation B. Imposition C. Borrowed D. New interpretation of choreography

IV. Typology based on consciousness (related to participation purpose) A. Transcendental (altered states of consciousness; purpose

is to achieve extraordinary metaphysical-physical experience) 1. Religious (associated with deities, spirits, essence) 2. Secular (associated with self-extension and exploration)

B. Temporal-cognitive (ccncern with explanation, prediction) 1. Control (maintaining cultural patterns and managing

tensions, attaining goals, adaptation, and integration: initiating and coping with change)

2. Physical preparation (for work, war, etc.) C. Temporal/transcendental (one form leading to another,

intermeshing, alternating)

field of dance per se has been performance-oriented and/or self- actualizing (creative self-expression), some reviewers of the field come from music, art, history, classics, and English; they introduce another set of ancestors.

Seeking scholarly roots and interrelationships is part of the academic way. One can only hope that the devotion of energies to paying homage to favorite researchers will not detract from the growth and development of the dance specialization. George Jackson's comment at the recent CORD-George Washington University Workshop on Research in Dance comes to mind here. Jackson, a biologist and dance critic, reported how Joseph Mazo's book Dance is a Contact Sport (1974), an excellent ethnography on the New York City Ballet written by a writer for Women's Wear Daily, was received by the dancers: they looked in the index to see how many times they were mentioned and then read the lines written about themselves out of context.

Lange asks for a "worldwide chronological review of major works," Royce requests a "complete review of the anthropology of dance" and implicitly an "introduction," and Kubik would like references to recent work on the study of movement behavior in music/dance. The stated purpose of my article, however, is to offer a dynamic communication model; "a summary review of the field" provides a context for the presentation. An abridgment, by definition, cannot be inclusive. Furthermore, an introduction would be inappropriate in a scholarly journal in which Kurath laid the groundwork more than a decade ago and others presented overviews in 1974 and 1977. I admit and apologize for an English-language bias. I hope my multilingual colleagues will point out how other literature bears upon the theoretical issues I have raised.

Lange defends Sachs's contribution to the anthropological study of dance and dismisses Kealiinohomoku's and Younger- man's critiques. However, within the context of contemporary Anglo-American anthropological theory, method, and empirical findings, Youngerman (1974, 1976) points to outdated concepts and factual errors in Sachs's work. In so doing, she performs an important role, since that work is still used as a basic text in departments of dance, physical education, etc., and indeed continues to influence some writers (cf. Williams 1976-77a, who adds Lange to Youngerman's list of perpetuators of Sachs's fallacies). Obviously there appear to be different evaluations of Sachs and Laban.

Royce claims I slight "pertinent areas" of anthropology: political, symbolic, and psychological. Many anthropologists, however, subsume these areas within social and cultural anthropology (cf. Honigmann 1973). My illustrative discussion of Ubakala dance does address some of the concerns of these areas: social role differentiation, mediation of paradoxes, relationships between people and groups of people, social drama, a system of symbols and meanings, and human cognitive processes.

My bibliography (1976b, revised 1978) does include a section on methods (general, movement notation and analytic units, and structural analyses of dance) and lists Kubik's fine 1972 work, in which he reports that music process and product may include more than audible aspects: "motor images" and a gestalt perception contribute to rhythmic orientation in some African music.

Kealiinohomoku wonders what anthropologists called dances which differed from ballet or jigs "lewd ambling" or "imitative fornication." The early "anthropologists," markedly different from our Ph.D. vintage, included E. G. Tylor, Sir Henry Maine, Lewis Henry Morgan, and missionaries carrying out the early ethnographic research (e.g., G. T. Basden in Nigeria). The Royal Anthropological Institute of Great Britain and Ire- land was formed in 1871, the Society for Anthropology, Eth- nology, and Prehistory in 1869. Malinowski (1936) said that the early missionaries in Africa were "frightened of the dances without ever coming near them," believing "that all dancing




Ilanna: ANTHROPOLOGICAL STUDY OF DANCE must lead to fornication." As Kealiinohomoku points out, scholars may not be "more sophisticated than their time warranted." Many Third World countries and minorities find residues of ethnocentrism in contemporary research.

I have certainly tried not to dismiss important people in an offhanded fashion, but I have perhaps not given serious attention to some writers thought by Kaeppler to be significant. The subjective nature of "importance" is apparent in Kaeppler's (1978) overview of the anthropological study of dance. In her "history," Boas is noted as influencing Kealiinohomoku's 1965 master's thesis through the influence of one of his students. His other students and "descendants" who have written on dance, including Margaret Mead, are neglected. Furthermore, there is no mention of the work of some outstanding British social anthropologists and French ethnologists; of Africa, where many anthropologists conducted field research which included dance; or of the broad influence of Merriam, through his Anthropology of Music (1964) and his supervision of several doctoral disser- tations which deal with dance.

The attention and praise Kaeppler devotes to a modest master's thesis is unusual. The work in question (Kealiino- homoku 1977) did not involve African field research, but relied on other researchers' films-i.e., on traits out of context. Al- though Kaeppler rightly criticizes Lomax for drawing his conclusions from an inadequate data base, no mention is made of the similar shortcoming in this thesis, with its generalizations about Africa (which has about 1,000 different language groups and about that many dance-pattern constellations) on the basis of seven films, only one of which is analyzed in detail. There is no evidence that the dances that were filmed are representative; information gathered from inaccurate written sources is used to amplify the film data; and African dances are assumed to be unchanging. These problems call into question the validity of the work (cf. Hanna 1975c, Williams 1976-77a) and its Boasian influence. This is not to criticize the thesis; it is an adequate effort for that level of scholarship.

My understanding of Kaeppler (1972), as presented in noting some problematic issues in her structural study-an understanding she finds inadequate-is based on her own words: We want to know what movements are significant and how they can be combined from the point of view of the holders of the tradition themselves. [p. 173] I tried to watch certain individuals do the same movements over and over. This was accomplished by having people teach me dances and thus they had to do the movements repeatedly. While learning I questioned my teachers if movements should be done one way or another. [p. 175] Hypotheses were tested by performing the movements for holders of the dance tradition, thus verifying, modifying, or rejecting them. [p. 176]

My intent in this article was not to-provide an in-depth discussion of any approach, but to highlight how, with attention to the problems, it fits into an overarching theoretical model.

Kaeppler faults my style and clarity in presenting the model. Echoing Kaeppler, Kealiinohomoku states that she and some others "who are studying the anthropology of dance" do not understand my ideas-and the burden is on me. Although I admit that my exposition could be more lucid, focus on style could be a substitute for intellectually coming to grips with theoretical and methodological issues-approaching them on their own ground and engaging in the scholarly dialogue intended by the CA format.3 Since Kaeppler claims her work was done using contrastive analysis, use of the approach in her comments would have been constructive. In her "alternate view of dance in anthropological perspective" (Kaeppler 1978) she does not address the processes of the interrelation of hu-

3 After all, the hallmark of anthropology is considering alternate ways of looking at the world.

man movement systems, society, and culture and the task of finding meaning in movement raised in my article. Nor does Kealiinohomoku, to whose dissertation I did give attention.

Communication is a two-way process. The discussion of my article suggests that most anthropologists and scholars in other fields understand it. Furthermore, a bibliography informing the theory and method has been available since 1976 (from the author and a dozen distributors in the United States and abroad). The concepts in the article have appeared publically in professional meetings or circulated in published and unpublished form since 1973. My University of Texas at Dallas undergradu- ate students, in a six-week course entitled "Dance and So- ciety," were able to use the model in their field research after an introduction to the technical terminology ("jargon") of the social sciences. In a one-hour session of the Workshop on Re- search in Dance, Washington Post and Washington Star dance critics expressed enthusiasm over the idea of using the model and grid to help them communicate with the lay public.

Abrahams raises an important issue in semantic analysis: amount of "native exegesis" and amount of inference from "a closely mapped relationship between dance form and movement and the other more verbally adumbrated expressive- symbolic enactments" of a group. We do not yet have a method for quantifying insider-outsider sets of data and assigning them appropriate weights in determining meaning. Geertz (1973), Turner (1969), Sperber (1974), and Hanna (1978b) have ad- dressed some of the issues. People can act appropriately when they smell smoke without being able to describe smoke; description is the poet's forte. Cottle's (1966) research with different social classes in an urban area suggests Americans' formi- dable task in verbalizing meaning in movement. There is intracultural and intraclass variation (Pelto and Pelto 1975). Whereas informants portray world views and behaviors from a personal perspective, circumstance, and interest, analysts attempt to place the views and behaviors in their broader settings. In short, it is necessary to take into account what informants say about movement, how actors use movement and relate to each other in the process, and how movement relates to other symbol systems.

Abrahams points out that couple-dancing comes to have meaning in courtship and dyadic family patterns. Yet, in inter- viewing a sample of participants in one social-center dance class, a student of mine at the University of Texas at Dallas, Debbie Landau, found that some participants had sexual interests whereas others wanted to lose weight and that the spatial patterning of the movement was irrelevant.

In conclusion, I wish to thank my colleagues for their insightful commentaries and valuable contributions toward understanding humans through the anthropological study of dance. I presented a summary review of illustrative works to show how, with attention to their shortcomings, they relate to the concept, process, product, and consequences of dance as diagrammatically presented in a dynamic communication model informed by the discipline of anthropology (which, of course, overlaps with other disciplines). Since there are several systems and approaches for describing physical movement and none for seeking meaning in movement, I proposed a semantic grid toward that end. To understand dance per se, we need studies on fragments of what is portrayed in the model, which is a synthesis of valuable approaches used by scholars studying dance. Separation of aspects to delimit a feasible study (cf. Dev- ons and Gluckman 1964) is appropriate, however, only on the condition that the relations of parts to the whole remain intact. Anthropologists have increased our storehouse of knowledge about dance, a relatively new area of specialization. The relations, theoretical and methodological, of anthropologically generated dance knowledge to the understanding of humans

Vol. 20 No. 2 * June 1979 335



in the nondance concerns of the discipline at large deserve attention. The fruits of such labor will lead to status parity with other specializations. In turn, parity will develop the specialization of the anthropological study of dance and increase our understanding of Homo sapiens.

References Cited ALLAND, ALEXANDER, JR. 1976. "The roots of art," in Ritual, play,

and performance. Edited by Richard Schechner and Mady Schu- man, pp. 5-17. New York: Seabury Press.

ARMSTRONG, ROBERT P. 1971. The affecting presence: An essay in anthropology. Urbana: University of Illinois Press.

BARTHES, ROLAND. 1970. Elements of semiology. Translated by Annette Lavers and Colin Smith. Boston: Beacon Press.

BATESON, GREGORY. 1972. Steps to an ecology of mind. New York: Ballantine.

BATESON, GREGORY, and MARGARET MEAD. 1942. Balinese character: A photographic analysis. New York: New York Academy of Sciences.

BECKER, HOWARD S. 1974. Art as collective action. American Socio- logical Review 39:767-76.

BENESH, RUDOLF, and JOAN BENESH. 1956. An introduction to Benesh Dance Notation. London: A. and C. Black.

BERLYNE, DANIEL F. 1966a. Curiosity and exploration. Science 153: 25-33. [NRC]

-. 1966b. Conflict and arousal. Scientific American 215(2):82- 87. [NRC]

1971. Aesthetics and psychobiology. New York: Appleton- Century-Crofts.

-. 1972. "Affective aspects of aesthetic communication," in Communication and affect. Edited by Thomas Alloway, Lester Krames, and Patricia Pliner, pp. 102-18. New York: Academic Press.

BIRDWHISTELL, RAY L. 1963. "The kinesic level in the investigation of the emotions," in Expression of the emotions in man. Edited by Peter H. Knapp, pp. 123-39. New York: International Universities Press.

1970. Kinesics and context: Essays on body motion communication. Philadelphia: University of Pennsvlvania Press.

BLACKING, JOHN. 1962. Musical expeditions of the Venda. African Music 3(l):54-78.

-. 1967. Venda children's songs: A study in ethnomusicological analysis. Johannesburg: Witwatersrand University Press.

. 1969. Songs, dances, mimes and symbolism of Venda girls' ini- tiation schools. African Studies 28:3-35, 69-118, 149-99, 215-66.

. 1974. "Ethnomusicology as a key subject in the social sciences," in Memoriam Ant6nio Jorge Dias, vol. 3, pp. 71-93. Lisboa: Instituto de Alta Cultural, Junta de Investigag6es Cientificas do Ultramar.

-. 1977. "Towards an anthropology of the body," in The anthropology of the body. Edited by John Blacking, pp. 1-28. London: Academic Press.

BLANK, JUDITH. 1973. The story of the Chou dance of the former Mayurbhanj State, Orissa. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Uni- versity of Chicago, Chicago, Ill.

BLOCH, MAURICE. 1974. Symbols, song, dance and features of articulation: Is religion an extreme form of traditional authority? Archives Europeennes de Sociologie 15:51-81.

BOAS, FRANZ. 1955 (1928). Primitive art. Cambridge: Harvard Uni- versity Press.

BOAS, FRANZISKA. Editor. 1944. The function of dance in human society. New York: The Boas School.

BOHANNAN, PAUL J. 1978. An open letter from the president: se pluri- bus unum? Anthropology Newsletter 19(1):1, 17.

BOURGUIGNON, ERIKA. 1968. Trance dance. Dance Perspectives 35. [APR]

1973. "Psychological anthropology," in Handbook of social and cultural anthropology. Edited by John J. Honigmann, pp. 1073- 1118. Chicago: Rand McNally.

CHAPPLE, ELIOT. 1970. Culture and biological man. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.

CICOUREL, AARON V. 1974. Cognitive sociology: Language and meaning in social interaction. New York: Free Press.

COLLIER, JOHN, JR. 1967. Visual anthropology: Photography as a research method. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.

COLSON, ELIZABETH. 1971. The social consequences of resettlement. Manchester: Manchester University Press.

COMITAS, LAMBROS, and JANET DOLGIN. 1978. On anthropology and education: Retrospect and prospect. Anthropology and Education Quarterly 9(3): 165-80.

COPELAND, ROGER. 1978. Why Cuba champions ballet. New York Times, June 11, pp. 1, 9, 13.

COTTLE, THOMAS J. 1966. Social class and social dancing. Sociological Quarterly 7:179-96.

CRUMRINE, N. Ross. 1968. Anthropological antinomy: The importance of an empirical basis for a concept of anthropological fact. Anthropological Quarterlv 41:34-46. [NRC]

-. 1969. Capakoba, the Mayo Easter ceremonial impersonator: Explanations of ritual clowning. Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion 8:1-22. [NRC]

. 1974a. El ceremonial de Pascua y la identidad de los Mayos de Sonora (Mexico). Publicaciones del Instituto Nacional Indigenista 31. [NRC]

. 1974b. Anomalous figures and liminal roles: A reconsidera- tion of the Mayo Indian Capakoba, Northwest Mexico. Anthropos 69:858-73. [NRC] - . 1976. Mediating roles in ritual and symbolism: Northwest Mexico and the Pacific Northwest. Anthropologica 18:131-52. [NRC]

. 1977. The Mavo Indians of Sonora, Mexico: A people who re- fuse to die. Tucson: University of Arizona Press. [NRC]

DARWIN, CHARLES. 1962 (1872). The expression of the emotions in man and animals. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. [PH, AS]

DAUER, A. M. 1967. Stil und Technik im afrikanischen Tanz. Afrika Heute (Sonderbeilage), no. 24, December 15, pp. 1-12. [GK]

. 1969. Zum Bewegungsverhalten afrikanischer Tanzer. Re- search Film 6:517-26. [GK]

D'AZEVEDO, WARREN L. Editor. 1973. The traditional artist in African societies. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.

DELL, CECILY. 1970. A primer for movement description. New York: Dance Notation Bureau.

DEVONS, ELY, and MAX GLUCKMAN. 1964. "Conclusions: Modes and consequences of limiting a field of study," in Closed systems and open minds. Edited by Max Gluckman, pp. 83-102. Chicago: Aldine.

DEWEY, JOHN. 1922. Experience and nature. New York: W. W. Nor- ton.

DUTTON, DENIS. 1977. Art, behavior, and the anthropologists. CUR- RENT ANTHROPOLOGY 18:387-94. [RVG1

EKMAN, PAUL. 1971. "Universals and cultural differences in facial expressions of emotion," in Nebraska symposium on motivation, pp. 207-83. Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press.

EKMAN, PAUL, and WALLACE V. FRIESEN. 1969. The repertoire of nonverbal behavior: Categories, origins, usage, and coding. Semi- otica 1:50-98.

EVANS-PRITCHARD, E. E. 1928. The dance. Africa 1:436-62. . 1965. Theories of primitive religion. Oxford: Clarendon Press.

FERNANDEZ, JAMES W. 1965. Symbolic consensus in a Fang reforma- tive cult. American Anthropologist 67:902-29.

FISHER, SEYMOUR. 1970. Body experience in fantasy and behaviour. New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts.

. 1974. Body consciousness. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice-Hall. GEERTZ, CLIFFORD. 1973. The interpretation of cultures. New York:

Basic Books. GIURCHESCU, ANCA. 1974. La danse comme objet semiotique. 1973

Yearbook of the International Folk Music Council 5:165-74. GIZYCKI, RENATE VON. 1971. Haku mele, Der Poet in Polynesien: Ein

sozialanthropologischer Beitrag zur Rolle des Kiinstlers. (G6ttinger Philosophische Dissertation, Arbeiten aus dem Institut fur Volker- kunde der Universitat zu Gbttingen, 6.) Miinchen: Klaus Ren- ner. [RVG]

GOLDFARB, JEFFREY C. 1978. Social bases of independent expression in Communist societies. American Journal of Sociology 83: 940-49.

GOODMAN, NELSON. 1975. The status of style. Critical Inquiry 1: 799- 812.

GOULDNER, NANCY. 1977-78. The School of American Ballet. Ballet Review 6(1):1-16.

GRIAULE, MARCEL. 1965. Conversations with Ogotemmeli. London: Oxford University Press.

GROSSE, ERNST. 1909. "The dance," in Source book for social origins. Edited by William I. Thomas, pp. 577-93. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

GtNTHER, HELMUT. 1969. Grundphdnomene und Grundbegriffe des afrikanischen und afroamerikanischen Tanzes. Beitrage zur Jazz- forschung/Studies in Jazz Research (Graz) 1. [GK]

GUMPERZ, JOHN J. 1974. Linguistic anthropology in society. American Anthropologist 76:785-98.

HALL, EDWARD. 1966. The hidden dimension. Garden City: Anchor. HALL, FERNAU. 1968. Noh, kabuki, kathakali. Sangeet Natak 7:33-75.

[APR] HANNA, JUDITH LYNNE. 1975a. Dances of Anahuac-for God or man?

An alternate way of thinking about prehistory. Dance Research Journal 7(1): 13-27. -. 1975b. The anthropology of dance: Reflections on the CORD COnferenCe. CURRENT ANTHROPOLOGY 16: 445-46.




Hanna: ANTHROPOLOGICAL STUDY OF DANCE - 1975c. Review of: African art in motion, by Robert Farris Thompson (Waltham, Mass.: African Studies Association, 1974). African Studies Association Review of Books 1:5-9.

. 1976a. The anthropology of dance ritual: Nigeria's Ubakala Nkwa di Iche Iche. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Columbia University, New York, N.Y.

. 1976b. The anthropology of dance: A selected bibliography. (Re- vised in 1978.) Available from the author and from R. L. Shep, Seattle; Ge Nabrink, Amsterdam; Theatrebooks, Toronto; Dance Mart, New York; Dance Etc., Oakland; Dance Books, Ltd., Lon- don.

. 1977a. "African dance and the warrior tradition," in The warrior tradition in modern Africa. Edited by Ali Mazrui, pp. 111-33. Journal of Asian and African Studies 12(1-2).

. 1977b. "To dance is human: Some psychobiological bases of an expressive form," in The anthropology of the body. Edited by John Blacking, pp. 211-32. London: Academic Press.

. 1978a. Toward semantic analysis of movement behavior: Concepts and problems. Semiotica. In press.

-. 1978b. African dance: Some implications for dance therapy. American Journal of Dance Therapy 2(1) : 3-15. -- 1979a. To dance is human: A theory of nonverbal communication. Austin: University of Texas Press. In press.

. 1979b. "Toward a cross-cultural conceptualization of dance and some correlate considerations," in The performing arts: Music, dance, theater. Edited by John Blacking. Berlin: de Gruyter. In press.

HARASYMCZUK, R. W. 1939. Tanice huculskie. Lw6w: Towarzystwo Ludoznawcze. [RL]

HATCH, FRANK WHITE. 1973. A behavioral cybernetic interpretation of dance and dance culture. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Uni- versity of Wisconsin, Madison, Wis.

HELU, FUTA. 1978. Tongan poetry. I. Faikava (Nuku'alofa,Tonga),. no. 1, p. 22. [RVG]

HIGGINS, JOSEPH R. 1977. Human movement: An integrated approach. St. Louis: C. V. Mosby.

HOCKINGS, PAUL. Editor. 1975. Principles of visual anthropology. The Hague: Mouton.

HOERBURGER, F. 1956. Deutsch-slavische Wechselbeziehungen im Volkstanz. Volkskunst 5(7) :11-13. [RL]

HOGBIN, IAN. 1914. A Guadalcanal society: The Kaoka-speakers. New York: Holt.

HONIGMANN, JOHN J. Editor. 1973. Handbook of social and cultural anthropology. Chicago: Rand McNally.

HORTON, ROBIN. 1960. The gods as guests: An aspect of Kalabari religious life. Nigeria Magazine Special Publication. --. 1963. The Kalabari Ekine society: A borderland of religion and art. Africa 33:94-114.

1964. Ritual man in Africa. Africa 34:85-104. 1966. Igbo: An ordeal for aristocrats. Nigeria Magazine 90:

168-83. 1967. Ikaki: The Tortoise masquerade. Nigeria Magazine 94:

226-39. HOSPERS, JOHN. 1968. "On explanation," in Theory in anthropology:

A sourcebook. Edited by Robert A. Manners and David Kaplan, pp. 69-79. Chicago: Aldine.

HUTCHINSON, ANN. 1970. Revised and expanded edition. Labanota- tion. New York: Theatre Arts Books.

HYMES, DELL. 1967. "The anthropology of communication," in Hu- man communication theory. Edited by Frank E. X. Dance, pp. 1-39. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.

. 1974. Foundations in sociolinguistics: An ethnographic approach. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press.

IKEGAMI, YOSHIHIKO. 1971. A stratificational analysis of the hand gesture in Indian classical dancing. Semiotica 4:365-91.

. 1977-78. "Suru" to "naru" no gengogaku (Linguistics of "doing" and "becoming"). Gengo, September 1977-August 1978. ry']

-. n.d.a. How universal is a localistic hypothesis? A linguistic contribution to the study of the "semantic styles" of language. Trier, Federal Republic of Germanv: Linguistic Agency, University of Trier. In press. [YI]

-. n.d.b. "DO-language vs. BECOME-language: An implication of the localistic analysis of the representation of 'change' and 'state' in language." Proceedings of the Twelfth International Congress of Linguists, Vienna, August 28-September 2, 1977. Edited by W. Dressler. In press. [YI]

JABLONKO, ALLISON. 1968. Dance and daily activities among the Maring people of New Guinea: A cinematographic analysis of body movement style. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Columbia Uni- versity, New York, N.Y.

KAEPPLER, ADRIENNE. 1967. The structure of Tongan dance. Un- published doctoral dissertation, University of Hawaii, Honolulu, Hawaii. [APR]

.1972. Method and theory in analyzing dance structure with an analysis of Tongan dance. Ethnomusicology 16: 173-217.

. 1978. Dance in anthropological perspective. Annual Review of Anthropology 7:31-49. [ALK]

KEALTINOHOMOKU, JOANN WHEELER. 1967. Hopi and Polynesian dance: A study in cross-cultural comparisons. Ethnomusicology 11: 343-58.

. 1969-70. An anthropologist looks at ballet as a form of ethnic dance. Impulse: Extensions of Dance, pp. 24-33.

- . 1972. "Folk dance," in Folklore and folklife: An introduction. Edited by Richard M. Dorson, pp. 381-404. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

. 1976. Theory and methods for an anthropological study of dance. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Indiana University, Bloomington, Ind.

. 1977. "A comparative study of dance as a constellation of motor behaviors among African and United States Negroes," in Reflections on perspectives on two anthropological studies of dance. Edited by Adrienne L. Kaeppler. Dance Research Annual 7.

KEALIINOHOMOKU, JOANN WHEELER, and FRANK J. GILLIS. 1970. Spe- cial bibliography: Gertrude Prokosch Kurath. Ethnomusicology 14: 114-28.

KERN, STEPHEN. 1975. Anatomy and destiny: A cultural 'history of the human body. New York: Bobbs-Merrill.

KIRSTEIN, LINCOLN. 1970. Movement and metaphor: Four centuries of ballet. New York: Praeger.

KLEINMAN, SEYMOUR. 1975. Movement notation svstems: An introduction. Quest (The Language of M4 ovement) 23:33-56.

KNAPP, PETER H. Editor. 1963. Expression of the emotions in man. New York: International Universities Press.

KOESTLER, ARTHUR. 1967. The act of creation: A study of the consciouis atnd unconscious in science and art. New York: Dell.

KREBS, STEPHANIE. 1975a. Nonverbal communication in Khon dance-drama: Thai society onstage. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Harvard University, Cambridge, Mass.

-. 1975b. "The film elicitation technique: Using film to elicit conceptual categories of culture," in Principles of visual anthropology. Edited by Paul Hockings. The Hague: Mouton.

KREITLER, HANS, and SHULAMITH KREITLER. 1972. "Dance, " in Psychology of the arts, pp. 157-85. Durham: Duke University Press.

KUBIK, GERHARD. 1972. Transcription of African music from silent film: Theory and methods. African Music 5 (2):28-39. [GK] --. 1973. "Music and dance education in mukanda schools of Mbwela and Nkangela communities." Proceedings of the Lusaka Music Conference, June 15-22, 1971, Lusaka. (Reprinted in Review of Ethnology 4 [7-91.) [GK]

-. 1975. Aufnahme und Auswertung von Kinematogrammen malawischer Musik. Wissenschaftlicher Film, no. 16, September, pp. 44-52. [GK] - . 1977. "Patterns of body movement in the music of boys' ini- tiation in south-east Angola," in The anthropology of the body. Edited by John Blacking. London: Tavistock. [GK]

KUJPER, HTLDA. 1968. Celebration of growth and kingship: Incwala in Swaziland. African Arts 1(3):57-59, 90.

KURATH, GERTRUDE PROKOSCH. 1946. Los concheros. Journal of American Folklore 59:387-99. --. 1956a. Choreology and anthropology. American Anthro polo- gist 58:177-79.

. 1956b. Dance relatives of Mid-Europe and Middle America. Journal of American Folklore 69:286-98.

. 1960. Panorama of dance ethnology. CURRENT ANTHROPOLOGY 1:233-54.

. 1964. Iroquois music and dance: Ceremonial arts of two Seneca longhouses. Bureau of American Ethnology Bulletin 187.

-. 1968. Dance and song rituals of Six Nations Reserve, Ontario. National Museum of Canada, Bulletin 220, Folklore Series 4.

. 1970. Music and dance in Tewa plaza ceremonies, New Mexico. Santa Fe: University of New Mexico Press.

KURATH, GERTRUDE PROKOSCH, and SAMUEL MARTI. 1964. Dances of Andhuac: The choreography and music of pre-Cortesian dances. Vi- king Fund Publications in Anthropology 38.

LABAN, R. 1926. Choreographie. Jena: Eugen Diederichs. [RL] . 1950. The mastery of movement on the stage. London: Mac-

donald and Evans. [RL] --. 1956. Principles of dance and movement notation. London: Macdonald and Evans. [RLl

1966. Choreutics. London: Macdonald and Evans. [RL] 1974. The language of movement: A guidebook to choreutics.

Annotated and edited by Lisa Ullmann. Boston: Plays. LABAN, R., and F. C. LAWRENCE. 1947. Effort. London: Macdonald

and Evans. [RL] LAFRANCE, MARIANNE, and CLARA MAYO. 1978. Moving bodies: Non-

verbal communication in social relationships. Monterey: Brooks/ Cole (Wadsworth).

Vol. 20 * No. 2 * June 1979



LANGE, R. 1964. "Kinetography Laban and the folk dance research in Poland." (Summary.) Proceedings of the VII International Con- gress of Anthropological and Ethnological Sciences, Moscow. [RL]

LANGER, SUZANNE. 1957. Problems of art. New York: Scribner. LAUDOVAI, H. 1963. Sword dances and their parallels in the CSR.

Journal of the International Folk Music Council 15:62-63. [RL] Lf,VI-STRAUSS, CLAUDE. 1963. Structural anthropology. New York:

Basic Books. LEX, BARBARA W. 1974. Voodoo death: New thoughts on an old ex-

planation. American Anthropologist 76:819-23. -. 1975. Physiological aspects of ritual trance. Journal of Altered

States of Consciousness 2(2). LIENHARDT, GODFREY. 1957. Anuak village headmen. Africa 27:

341-55. LOMAX, ALAN, IRMGARD BARTENIEFF, and FORRESTINE PAULAY.

1968. "Dance style and culture: The choreometric coding book," in Folk song style and culture. Edited by Alan Lomax, pp. 222-47, 262-73. Washington, D.C.: American Association for the Advance- ment of Science.

LORENZ, KONRAD. 1966. "Evolution of ritual in the biological and cultural spheres," in A discussion on ritualization of behaviour in animals and man. Organized by Sir Julian Huxley, pp. 273-77. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society, Series B, no. 772, vol. 251. [RD]

MACKAY, D. M. 1972. "Formal analysis of communicative processes," in Non-verbal communication. Edited by R. A. Hinde, pp. 3-26. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

MALINOWSKI, B. 1936. Native education and culture contact. Inter- national Review of Missions 25:480-515.

MARANDA, ELLI KONGXS. 1970. Deep significance and surface significance: Is cantometrics possible? Semiotica 2:173-84.

MARETT, R. R. 1914. 2d edition. The threshold of religion. London: Methuen.

MARSHALL, LORNA. 1962. Kung Bushman religious beliefs. Africa 32:221-52.

. 1969. The Medicine Dance of the !Kung Bushmen. Africa 39:347-81.

MARTIN, GYORGY, and ERNO PESOVAR. 1961. A structural analysis of the Hungarian folk dance (a methodological sketch). Acta Ethnographica 10: 1-40.

MAZO, JOSEPH H. 1974. Dance is a contact sport. New York: Dutton. MEAD, MARGARET. 1928. Coming of age in Samoa. New York: Mor-

row. 1940. The arts. Yale Review 30:334-47. 1966. An anthropologist at work. New York: Atherton. [JWKI

MEHRABIAN, ALBERT. 1972. Nonverbal communication. New York: Aldine-Atherton.

MEILLASSOUX, CLAUDE. 1965. The "Koteba" of Bamako. Presence Africaine 24(52):159-93.

MERRIAM, ALAN P. 1974. "Anthropology and the dance," in New dimensions in dance research: Anthropology and dance. Edited by Tamara Comstock, pp. 9-28. New York: Committee on Research in Dance.

MERTON, ROBERT K. 1957. Social theory and social structure. Glencoe: Free Press.

MILLS, GEORGE. 1973. "Art and the anthropological lens," in The traditional artist in African societies. Edited by Warren L. d'Aze- vedo, pp. 379-416. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.

MITCHELL, J. CLYDE. 1956. The Kalela dance. Rhodes-Livingstone Institute Paper 27.

MORRIS, CHARLES. 1955. Signs, language and behavior. New York: Braziller.

MORRIS, DESMOND. 1956. "Typical intensity" and its relation to the problem of ritualisation. Behaviour 11: 1-12. [RD]

MUNN, NANCY D. 1973. "Symbolism in a ritual context: Aspects of symbolic action," in Handbook of social and cultural anthropology. Edited by John J. Honigmann, pp. 579-612. Chicago: Rand McNally.

NADEL, S. F. 1942. A black Byzantium: The kingdom of Nupe in Nigeria. London: Oxford University Press.

ORNSTEIN, ROBERT. 1972. The psychology of consciousness. New York: Freeman.

ORTNER, SHERRY B. 1975. "Gods' bodies, gods' fools: A symbolic analysis of a Sherpa ritual," in The interpretation of symbolism. Edited by R. Willis, pp. 133-70. New York: Halsted.

PEACOCK, JAMEs L. 1968. Rites of modernization: Symbolic and social aspects of Indonesian proletarian drama. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

PECKHAM, MORRIS. 1965. Man's rage for chaos: Biology, behavior, and the arts. Philadelphia: Chilton.

PELTO, PERTTI J., and GRETEL H. PELTO. 1975. Intra-cultural diversity: Some theoretical issues. American Ethnologist 2: 1-18.

PITCAIRN, THOMAS K., and MARGRET SCHLEIDT. 1976. Dance and decision: An analysis of a courtship dance of the Medlpa, New Guin- ea. Behaviour 58: 298-316.

RADCLIFFE-BROWN, A. R. 1964(1922). The Andaman Islanders. Glen- coe: Free Press.

RAPPAPORT, Roy. 1971. Ritual, sanctity, and cybernetics. American Anthropologist 73:59-76. [RD]

Report of the International Folk Music Council Study Group for Folk Dance Terminology, 1972. Foundations for the analysis of the structure and form of folk dance: A syllabus. 1974. Yearbook of the International Folk Music Council 6:115-35.

ROUGET, GILBERT. 1965. Un film expe'rimental: Batteries Dogon, elements pour une etude de rhythmes. L'Homme 5(2). [GKI

ROYCE, ANYA PETERSON. 1974a. "Choreology today: A review of the field," in New dimensions in dance research: Anthropology and dance. Edited by Tamara Comstock, pp. 47-84. New York: Committee on Research in Dance. --. 1974b. Dance as an indicator of social class and identity in Juchitan, Oaxaca," in New dimensions in dance research: Anthro- pology and dance. Edited by Tamara Comstock, pp. 285-98. New York: Committee on Research in Dance.

-. 1977. The anthropology of dance. Bloomington: Indiana Uni- versity Press.

SACHS, C. 1933. Eine Weltgeschichte des Tanzes. Berlin: Dietrich Reimer und Ernst Vohsen. [RL] --. 1937. World history of the dance. Translated by Bessie Schon- berg. New York: Norton.

SACHS, NAHOMA. 1975. Music and meaning: Musical symbolism in a Macedonian village. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Indiana University, Bloomington, Ind.

SALDANA, NANCY. 1966. La Malinche: Her representation in dances of Mexico and the United States. Ethnomusicology 10:298-309. [APR]

SCHAEFFER, JOSEPH H. 1975. "Videotape: New techniques of observation and analysis in anthropology," in Principles of visual anthropology. Edited by Paul Hockings. The Hague: Mouton.

SHAPIRO, GARY. 1974. Intention and interpretation in art: A semiotic analysis. Journal of Aesthetics and Art Criticism 33(1) :33-42.

SHAY, ANTHONY. 1971. The functions of dance in human societies: An approach using context (dance event) not content (movements and gestures) for treating dance as anthropological data. Unpublished Master's thesis, California State College at Los Angeles, Los An- geles, Calif. [APR]

SHEETS, MAXIME. 1967. The phenomenology of dance. Madison: Uni- versity of Wisconsin Press.

SIEBER, RoY. 1973. "Approaches to non-Western art," in The traditional artist in African societies. Edited by Warren L. d'Azevedo, pp. 425-34. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.

SIEGEL, MARCIA B. 1974. New dance: Individuality, image and the demise of the coterie. Dance Magazine, April, pp. 38-44.

SINGER, ALICE. 1974. The metrical structure of Macedonian dance. Ethnomusicology 18:379-404.

SINGER, MILTON. 1972. When a great tradition modernizes. New York: Praeger.

SPERBER, DAN. 1974. Rethinking symbolism. Translated by Alice L Morton. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

SWEET, JILL. 1978-79. Review of: The anthropology of dance, by Anya Peterson Royce (Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1977). Dance Research Journal 11.

SWIFT, MARY GRACE. 1968. The art of dance in the U.S.S.R. Notre Dame: University Press.

SZENTPAL, 0. 1957. "Die Bedeutung der Kinetographie bei der Form- analyse des Volkstanzes." Proceedings of the International Con- gress for Dance Research and Notation, Dresden, 1957. MS, In- stitut fiir Volkskunst-Forschung, Leipzig.

. 1958. Versuch einer Formanalyse der ungarischen Volkstanze. Acta Ethnographica Academiae Scientiarum Hungaricae 7(3-4): 257-336.

TART, CHARLES T. Editor. 1969. Altered states of consciousness. New York: Wiley.

THEEMAN, MARGARET. 1973. Rhythms of community: The sociology of expressive body movement. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Harvard University, Cambridge, Mass.

TRACY, MARTIN. 1974. On the future of notation. Paper presented at the Conference of the Committee on Research in Dance and the annual meeting of the Society for Ethnomusicology, San Francisco, Calif.

TURNER, VICTOR W. 1964. "Betwixt and between: The liminal period in rites de passage," in Symposium on new approaches to the study of religion. Edited by June Helm. Seattle: University of Wash- ington Press, American Ethnological Society. [NRC] --. 1967. The forest of symbols: Aspects of Ndembu ritual. Ithaca: Cornell University Press.

-. 1969. The ritual process: Structure and anti-structure. Chicago: Aldine.

1974. Dramas, fields, and metaphor: Symbolic action in Auman society. Ithaca: Cornell University Press.

VATSYAYAN, KAPILA. 1968. Classical Indian dance in literature and the arts. New Delhi: Sangeet Natak Akademi.




Hanna: ANTHROPOLOGICAL STUDY OF DANCE VOLLAND, ANITA. 1975. The arts in Polynesia: A study of the functions and meaning of art forms in the pre-contact Pacific. Un- published doctoral dissertation, University of Pennsylvania, Phila- delphia, Pa.

WHORF, BENJAMIN LEE. 1971 (1956). Language, thought, and reality. Edited by John B. Carroll. Cambridge: M.I.T. Press. [YI]

WIENER, MORTON, SHANNON DEVOE, STUART RUBINOW, and JESSE GELLER. 1972. Nonverbal behavior and nonverbal communication. Psychological Review 79:185-214.

WILD, STEPHEN AUBREY. 1975. Walbiri music and dance in their social and cultural nexus. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, In- diana University, Bloomington, Ind.

WILLIAMS, DRID. 1976. The role of movement in selected symbolic systems. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Oxford University, Oxford, England. --. 1976-77a. Review of: The nature of dance: An anthropological

perspective, by Roderyk Lange (London: Macdonald and Evans, 1975). Dance Research Journal 9(1) :42-44. --. 1976-77b. An exercise in applied personal anthropology. Dance Research Journal 9(1) :16-30.

-. 1978. "Deep structure of the dance," in Yearbook of symbolic anthropology. Edited by Erik Schwimmer, pp. 211-30. London: Hurst.

YOUNGERMAN, SUZANNE. 1974. Curt Sachs and his heritage: A critical review of World history of the dance with a survey of recent studies that perpetuate his ideas. CORD News [now Dance Research Jour- nal 16(2):6-19. --. 1976. Review of: The nature of dance: An anthropological perspective, by Roderyk Lange (London: Macdonald and Evans, 1975). Ethnomusicology 20:374-77.

For Sale * Through the courtesy of His Holiness Sakya Trizin the Sakvapa Lama and the work of the Sakya Society of Canada, a series of taped recordings of Tibetan Tantric rituals is now available for study by Western scholars. In June 1978, the Sakyapa Lama, 40th Patriarch of the Sakyapa Order of Tibetan Buddhism, visited Toronto as part of a world tour designed to introduce Sakyapa philosophical and spiritual teachings to Westerners. While there he gave a number of Sakyapa lineage teachings in the empowerment ceremony known as wong kur. Since a considerable body of literature has been published about Tibetan Tantric teachings, His Holiness felt that it was time to record the rudiments of the ceremonies which provide the framework for the practice of these teachings. Thus he permitted the wong kurs to be recorded and agreed to make the recordings available to universities, libraries, and study groups. Many universities and libraries already have copies of Tibetan Tantras; their translation can now be aug- mented by the oral teaching that goes with them.

Ten wong kurs were professionally recorded in high-quality stereo. They invoke the Tibetan deities of Manjusri, Amitahba, Vajrapani, The Healing Triad (Vajrapani, Hayagriva, and Garuda), The Great Mother, Dzambala, Mahakala, Sakyamuni Buddha, Vajrakila, and Chenresi. Questions and answers about Tibetan Buddhism and the practice of meditation in the West were also recorded. Together these dialogues reveal several of the Buddhist concepts that are considered before wong kur is entered. There are also two booklets, A Short History of the Sakyapa Order of Tibetan Buddhism and Advice to Those Receiving Wong Kur. The rituals were conducted in Tibetan. His Holiness explained the core details of each ritual in English.

The signs by which the Lama transmits his knowledge to the participants are arranged in order of increasing complexity; they undergo permutations related to the complexity of the Tantric symbols and their meanings. The signs convey information about the symbols. The participant, once conversant in and open to the "language" of the ceremony, becomes prepared to receive the meaning of the symbols. The wong kur ritual is the key to practice in the Tibetan Tantric tradition. The experience of the participant is controlled by the Lama, the master of practice. The participant is guided through a series

of stages designed progressively to penetrate the meanings and symbols wired into every human being. The master bestows upon the student a right of practice through the performance of a wong kur. Study of the ritual through these recordings is the closest one can get to the teachings of Tibetan Tantric Buddhism without actually entering meditation practice oneself.

A limited number of copies of the tapes and the booklets is available for purchase. The proceeds are a source of support for the Sakya Centre in Toronto, a charitable organization dedicated to the dissemination of the Sakyapa lineage teachings in English, as well as for Tibetan refugees and the Sakyapa Order. To order the materials, please send U.S. $108 (Canadians may pay in current funds but must show proof of nationality) to Wesley Knapp, 2135 Lakeshore Blvd. West, Toronto, Ont., Canada M8V lAl. Cheques should be made payable to the Sakya Thupten Namgyal Ling.

Wanted

* Information on anthropological studies of monasticism, Christian or non-Christian, for doctoral research on spirituality and the reinterpretation of tradition in contemporary Benedic- tine monasticism. Please write: Robert Winthrop, Department of Anthropology, 215 Ford Hall, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, Minn. 55455, U.S.A.

* Information on internationally transferable endogenous technology, for information centers to be established in Nairobi, Kenya, and in the United States. Examples of such technology include the Eskimo method of making thread from the sinews of animals, which could be used in African villages; the cultiva- tion of bamboo shoots and seawood for food, practiced in Japan and potentially transferable to other parts of the world; and the use of straw to make rope, sacks, paper, and also raincoats and shoes that are comfortable and sanitary in a hot, humid climate. Please send technical details to Kivuto Ndeti, Director, Institute of African Population, Resources and Development Studies, P.O. Box 57156, Nairobi, Kenya, with a copy to Magoroh Maruyama, Department of Administrative Sciences, Southern Illinois University, Carbondale, Ill. 62901, U.S.A.

Vol. 20 * No. 2 * June 1979 339



movements toward understanding humans through the anthropological study of dance

Documents

unpublished

jill drayson

purpose transcending

social role

movements

dance research

judith lynne

anthropological