Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-dsjbd Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-27T19:29:16.972Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Dancing Contact Improvisation with Luce Irigaray: Intra‐Action and Elemental Passions

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 January 2020

Johanna Heil
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

This article takes as its point of departure Luce Irigaray's Elemental Passions, in which a woman‐speaker tries to make her lover and the discipline of philosophy understand that she is not how they have imagined her to be; that she is not at all but that she keeps becoming through perpetual movement. The article investigates Irigaray's investment in a form of materialist difference feminism that offers conceptual links to the posthumanist work of Karen Barad's agential realism, especially her theorization of intra‐action. The link between Irigaray and Barad is established via a diffractive reading that incorporates the dance/movement research practice of Contact Improvisation. Although expressed through written language, Elemental Passions creates the impression of the woman‐speaker dancing, of encountering herself, her environment, and her lover through moved and moving contact, searching for a practice of moving‐together, feeling‐with, and feeling‐between that can be experienced in an improvised dance duet. Exploring how touch and the sharing of weight in Contact Improvisation challenges boundaries and establishes ever‐changing configurations and entanglements between dancers, the article proposes that Irigaray's woman‐speaker envisions herself as a posthuman/ist woman and that improvised dancing offers a practice of intra‐action through which she can encounter the world in her becoming.

Type
Articles
Information
Hypatia , Volume 34 , Issue 3 , Summer 2019 , pp. 485 - 506
Copyright
Copyright © 2019 by Hypatia, Inc.

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Albright, Ann Cooper. 2003. Dwelling in possibility. In Taken by surprise: A dance improvisation reader, ed. Albright, Ann Cooper and Gere, David. Middletown, Conn.: Wesleyan University Press.Google Scholar
Albright, Ann Cooper. 2013. Feeling in and out: Contact Improvisation and the politics of empathy. In Touching and being touched: Kinesthesia and empathy in dance and movement, ed. Brandstetter, Gabriele, Egert, Gero, and Zubarik, Sabine. Berlin: De Gruyter.Google Scholar
Barad, Karen. 2003. Posthumanist performativity: Toward an understanding of how matter comes to matter. Signs: Journal of Women in Culture and Society 28 (3): 801–31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Barad, Karen. 2007. Meeting the universe halfway: Quantum physics and the entanglement of matter and meaning. Durham, N.C.: Duke University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Braidotti, Rosi. 2002. Metamorphoses: Towards a materialist theory of becoming. Malden, Mass.: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Braidotti, Rosi. 2003. Becoming woman: Or sexual difference revisited. Theory, Culture and Society 20 (3): 43–64.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Braidotti, Rosi. 2013. The posthuman. Cambridge, UK: Polity Press.Google Scholar
b., Lori. (1994) 2008. Sex talk: Harbin New Year's Jam 93/94, Harbin Hot Springs California. In Contact Improvisation Sourcebook II: Collected Writing and Graphics from Contact Quarterly Dance Journal 1992–2007, ed. Stark Smith, Nancy and Nelson, Lisa. Northampton, Mass.: Contact Editions.Google Scholar
Breithaupt, Fritz. 2017. Die dunklen Seiten der Empathie. Berlin: Suhrkamp.Google Scholar
Burke, Carolyn. 1981. Irigaray through the looking glass. Feminist Studies 7 (2): 288–306.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Canters, Hanneke, and Jantzen, Grace M. 2005. Forever fluid: A reading of Luce Irigaray's Elemental Passions. Manchester, UK: Manchester University Press.Google Scholar
Curtis, Jess, collator. 1995/2008. The man in the box: Interview with Steve Paxton at Breitenbush Conference ‘94. In Contact Improvisation Sourcebook II: Collected Writing and Graphics from Contact Quarterly Dance Journal 1992–2007. Northampton, Mass.: Contact Editions.Google Scholar
Decety, Jean, and Cowell, Jason M. 2015. Empathy, justice, and moral behavior. AJOB Neuroscience 6 (3): 3–14.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Dey, Misri, and Sarco‐Thomas, Malaika, eds. 2014. Framing the gap: Contact (and) improvisation. Special issue of Journal of Dance and Somatic Practices 6 (2).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Erdur, Defne. 2018. “Teaching” contact improvisation on the transitive line between life and art: Confrontations with the self, the other and the state. Conference paper. Dance Studies Association Conference, Valletta, Malta.Google Scholar
Fauré, Christine. 1981. The twilight of the goddesses, or the intellectual crisis of French feminism. Signs 7 (1): 81–86.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Foster, Susan Leigh. 1998. Choreographies of gender. Signs: Journal of Women in Culture and Society 24 (1): 1–33.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Foster, Susan Leigh. 2003. Improvisation in dance and mind. In Taken by surprise: A dance improvisation reader, ed. Albright, Ann Cooper and Gere, David. Middletown, Conn.: Wesleyan University Press.Google Scholar
Foster, Susan Leigh. 2011. Choreographing empathy: Kinesthesia in performance. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Fuss, Diana. 1989. Essentially speaking: Feminism, nature and difference. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Gallop, Jane. 1983. Quand nos lèvres s’écrivent: Irigaray's body politic. Romanic Review 74 (1): 77–83.Google Scholar
Geerts, Evelien, and van der Tuin, Iris. 2016. The feminist futures of reading diffractively: How Barad's methodology replaces conflict‐based readings of Beauvoir and Irigaray. Rhizomes: Cultural Studies in Emerging Knowledge 30. https://doi.org/10.20415/rhiz/030.e02.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gere, David. 2003. Introduction. In Taken by surprise: A dance improvisation reader, ed. Albright, Ann Cooper and Gere, David. Middletown, Conn.: Wesleyan University Press.Google Scholar
Goldman, Danielle. 2010. I want to be ready: Improvised dance as a practice of freedom. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Grosz, Elizabeth. 2011. Becoming undone: Darwinian reflections on life, politics, and art. Durham, N.C.: Duke University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Horwitz, Carol. 1998/2008. Values and contact improv: Breitenbush Conference ‘94 Discussion Report. In Contact improvisation sourcebook II: Collected writing and graphics from Contact Quarterly dance journal 1992–2007, ed. Stark Smith, Nancy and Nelson, Lisa. Northampton, Mass.: Contact Editions.Google Scholar
Irigaray, Luce. 1982/1992. Elemental passions. Trans. Joanne Collie and Judith Still. London: The Athlone Press.Google Scholar
Irigaray, Luce. 1994/2000. Democracy begins between two. Trans. Kirsteen Anderson. London: The Athlone Press.Google Scholar
Kraut, Anthea. 2008. Choreographing the folk: The dance stagings of Zora Neale Hurston. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.Google Scholar
Kreiter, Jo. 1994/2008. Mirror on the wall: A look inside a Contact duet. In Contact Improvisation Sourcebook II: Collected Writing and Graphics from Contact Quarterly Dance Journal 1992–2007, ed. Stark Smith, Nancy and Nelson, Lisa. Northampton, Mass.: Contact Editions.Google Scholar
Little, Nita. 2014. Restructuring the self‐sensing: Attention training in Contact Improvisation. Journal of Dance & Somatic Practices 6 (2): 247–60.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Little, Nita. 2016. Enminded performance: Dancing with a horse. In Sentient performativities of embodiment: Thinking alongside the human, ed. Hunter, Lynette, Krimmer, Elisabeth, and Lichtenfels, Peter. Lanham, Md.: Lexington Books.Google Scholar
Mackenzie, Catriona, and Scully, Jackie Leach. 2007. Moral imagination, disability and embodiment. Journal of Applied Philosophy 24 (4): 335–51.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Moi, Toril. 1985. Sexual/textual politics: Feminist literary theory. London: Methuen & Co.Google Scholar
Nelson, Nita Little. 2014. Articulating presence: Creative actions of embodied attention in contemporary dance. PhD dissertation, University of California Davis.Google Scholar
Paxton, Steve. 1979. A definition. Contact Quarterly 4 (2): 26.Google Scholar
Paxton, Steve. 2003. Drafting interior techniques. In Taken by surprise: A dance improvisation reader, ed. Albright, Ann Cooper and Gere, David. Middletown, Conn.: Wesleyan University Press.Google Scholar
Plaza, Monique. 1980. “Phallomorphic” power and the psychology of “women”. Feminist Issues 1 (1): 71–102.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Thiele, Kathrin. 2014. Pushing dualisms and differences: From “equality versus difference” to “nonmimetic sharing” and “staying with the trouble.” Women: A Cultural Review 25 (1): 9–26.Google Scholar
Whitford, Margaret. 1986. Speaking as a woman: Luce Irigaray and the female imaginary. Radical Philosophy 43 (4).Google Scholar