Re-configuring the dance sector through dance research: The Early Career Group of the FE:PDN
By Dr ‘Funmi Adewole Elliott – De Montfort University, Leicester
The Early Career Group of the Future Ecologies Producing Dance Network (FE:PDN) is a collective, not the only one no doubt, that will have a positive impact on how the dance sector survives and re-configures through this time of unprecedented change. You might consider me biased seeing that I am the group lead. Admittedly I am but only a little. The group was formed to gather together early career artists and practitioners to participate in a research project using ecological methods to conceptualise producing dance as a field and academic discipline. It is envisaged that the outcomes of the research will contribute to future proofing the dance sector. The group started in February 2024 will run until March 2025.
The group revolves around online meetings though some have attended in-person event organised by the wider network which can also be attended online. At our zoom meetings we discuss research questions and give presentations. My role as the group lead is to reflect and think critically on the outcomes of the sessions, report to the wider group and co- facilitate sessions and on occasion, take the role of provocateur. My co-facilitator is Dr Stefanie Sachsenmaier (University of Middlesex). We have now settled into being a group with about eight core members with about thirty others engaging with the group’s Facebook page, Padlet notes and coming occasionally to meetings.
The definition of early career for the network’s purposes was down to self-identification. Anyone who saw themselves as entering into new territory in any area of their work or studies was invited to join. As a result, our online gatherings have attracted PhD students, independent artists who have just graduated as well as those who have run their own companies for 40 years. Attendees have included those in arts management, dance criticism and interdisciplinary arts practices alongside those focused only on dance. The group also espouses on an expanded notion of producing dance (as opposed to dance production). This allowed for discussions around producing dance education, dance for health, and community building as well as the usual idea of staging dance productions.
From February to May 2024, we focused on and investigated four main questions, one per online meeting, via breakout room discussions. The questions considered how producing dance might contribute to the sustainability of dance as a sector and academic discipline.
-
- What is the nature of the present eco-system(s) for producing dance?
- What kind of mechanisms will make resilient the eco-system(s) of dance?
- How might producing dance be conceptualised as a form of academic research?
- How might practice research both inform and be enhanced by expanded notions of producing?
Between June 2024 to November 2024, we had three presentations from members of the group about their own work. As all the presenters were involved in producing their own work, their presentations spoke to the aims of the group in an interesting way. The outcomes of our discussions suggest that ‘producing dance’ as a field can open up a space for conceptualising new job roles, different types of collaborations between dance artists and dance organisations and the deployment of critical theory in the forging of artists’ networks.
The conversations in the group are pragmatic, grappling with the value of dance as well as the challenges of working in it. Participants draw on personal and professional experience as well as academic research. Many participants had pushed on with working in or studying dance in spite of COVID-19, the termination of dance degrees, reduced funding and the closure of dance support organisations. Responses to research questions one and two unsurprisingly painted the dance eco-system as a place of upheaval marked by advocacy by self-employed practitioners, active seeking of greater security, concerns about pensions and cost-of-living challenges. Some practitioners pointed out that there was a significant gap between undergraduate dance education and workplace realities. Dance training was described as becoming more focussed in conservatoires and increasingly interdisciplinary in all its forms with the division between commercial dance and contemporary dance as becoming blurred. Overall, the funding model and infrastructure for dance was thought of as being out of date. The kind of mechanisms imagined by the group included platforms that would facilitate the activities of artists who wanted to provide each other with peer-to-peer support. Some practitioners felt that in view of the lack of funding, organisations should give free space to artists for extended periods and support artists’ collectives to run their socially engaged projects and so foster resilience and community engagement. There was a consensus that there needed to be better mechanisms for accountability of arts organisations to ensure that their programmes align with artists’ needs, not just institutional criteria. Other suggestions included introducing agents for contemporary dancers (which presently is a practice associated with commercial dance) and that there should be advocacy projects that promote the role of aesthetics in intercultural communication and dance’s relevance as a source of embodied knowledge.
Responses to the third and fourth questions highlighted the fact that this research project was of interest mainly to those involved in dance in the subsidised sector where dance practitioners work with audiences, groups and sectors beyond entertainment such as in education, health and community development. The thoughts shared by the group pointed to an idea of ‘producing dance’ as an academic field that would draw from research methods found in critical theory, identity politics, health, spirituality, management studies, public relations and marketing. Some of the key concerns identified are as follows: The interrogation of the physical currency of dance and its unique qualities, the dual aspects of space – the social and institutional networks created by dance practices and the physical spaces required for performance and rehearsal, dance as a performative and presentational practice, a somatic practice for personal exploration, and an artistic form of meaning-making. Economic issues such as how to secure resources and finances to support research and development for dance artists, development of dance contexts and audiences and philosophical issues such as the role of aesthetics in fostering meaning-making and building community. Another idea that popped up was that job roles become hybrid i.e. choreographers would also be videographers, dance critics will become involved in dance-making processes.
After the meetings centred on these research questions, there was an appetite amongst some members of the group to keep going so we decided to make room for artists to give presentations about their work. The presentations took place between June and October 2024. As all the presenters had experience of self-producing their own work it was instructive in view of the aims of the group to hear about their research and experiences. Jen Stokes, PhD candidate, CEO and artistic director of Reside Dance C.I.C. was our first presenter. Entitled ‘A light in the darkness: Where can community dance take us now?’ Jen’s presentation explored the concept of social choreography and the impact this approach had had on her work in participatory dance over the last ten years.
‘Producing a legacy for Agbo Play: A talk and A performance’ with Ayodele Scott and David Evans, two senior practitioners, took place in September. Their commitment to sharing the legacy of their over 40 years in African theatre in Britain has led them to devise a flexible business model for their performances and workshops, drawing on their networks and relationships with venues.
Our last presentation in October was by Elspeth Chan, an experienced dance manager, dance scholar and emerging Butoh performer and workshop organiser. Her presentation on ‘Producing dance and critical world building – Through a Butoh lens’ discussed amongst other things why she believed Butoh could impact society positively.
All four of these practitioners were involved in developing specific performance contexts in order to further their practices within those contexts and had engaged with academic research as means of doing this. Their presentations gave credence to our findings from the group discussions that critical theory is finding an application in the producing of dance. You are warmly invited to engage with their work through the Zoom recordings of their presentations shared here.
How we perceive of producing dance as an emergent as field will have an impact on how we perceive of dance as a profession and an area for knowledge production especially for those working in the subsidised dance sector. The outcomes of the research with the Early Career Group suggest that producing dance will focus on producing the processes of dance making and dance engagement as much as the producing of dance performance. Perhaps going forward our concept of the dancer with a portfolio career will evolve into that of dancer with a portfolio of artistic processes working across career sectors. From January to March 2025 when the project ends, the Early Career Group members are invited to attend programmes run by the wider network and to offer feedback on the report that will be written on this eighteen-month research project. Many thanks to our Early Career Group members for giving their time and energy to this collective action towards the future proofing of dance.
Posts from Early Career Group members:
Producing Differently – The Raze Collective – by Josephine Leask