Dance on Film

I'm currently enrolled in a history of art course-"Introduction to World Cinema". So far these past few weeks we've gotten through primitive film, and begun to study silent films. Because HA260 is a survey course, the content covers narrative films only. (Although my professor claims we might touch on documentaries) This disappoints me, because I have a keen interest in avant garde film.

Visual art is so developed. It's been around for centuries. I love learning about the way we (all humanity) refined art over times. There are so many interesting patterns and quirks to it. These patterns apply to who we are and why we are that way. They say so much about our race. Art.

Dance hasn't been considered a fine art for very long. Neither has cinema. The two are fairly comparable really. Primitive cinema was a science. Technology beginning to develop. Early (European) performance dance included court dancing, and ballet. Standardized movement with little room for expression. Now, I'm not about to discredit early works of film or dance as worthless. I admit that I believe modern cinema and dance to be emotionally complex.

Tonight I went to a showing of various international dance works on film. Although theatrical in their creation, the shown pieces were performed on site. They were filmed on location. They were beautiful.

I watched them with a different perspective. The film itself was art. The dance itself was art. Together they were magnificent. But could they have gone further?

Tonight was probably my second time watching a dance film. I am an active member/student in the dance community. Is this genre of dance-related art underdeveloped? Why are these films considered avant garde?

Primitive film evolved into silent film because directors included elements of vaudville (popular entertainment at the time) on camera. Of course this was of the American taste. In France they began shooting at the opera. The audiences wanted to see something substantial. So they got that. They were presented stories from around the world (especially in the beginning-anything exotic was to be fancied). Cinematographers realized that their cameras had no reason to remain stationary, and neither their actors. The camera lense-our perspective- began to change.

We still generally watch dance on the stage. Occasionally you get site-specific work, but that's tricky and your intentions have to be different. The body moves in so many fascinating ways, so why must I watch it move from the mezzanine? Or the balcony? Row 52, seat 3? I want close ups. I want to see the undulation of the spine. Sweaty brows. Rising chests. Action-sped up and slowed down. I want depth.


I'm currently a dance major, history of art minor. I have a strong interest in dance on film. Tonight I was inspired.