Memory and Embodied Knowledge

In line with phenomenological thinking, Fraleigh states that dance as a lived experience leaves implicit traces upon the body (1987) but such traces might take the shape of memory/ muscle memory and choreographic memory. In specific reference to the body and its memory, Jaana Parviainen (1998 :54) recognises the body as a ‗―place of memories‖‘. Whilst this echoes Melrose‘s notion of the body as a container of knowledge, Parviainen also emphasises the internal experience of the body as she suggests that bodily memory is recollected through ‗felt quality‘ and as a result concedes that ‗body memories do not lend themselves easily to verbalisation‘ (1998: 55). Parviainen concedes that the ‗past is embodied in actions‘ which suggests that it is through movement that memory is created and it is also through movement that such memories are triggered. For Henri Bergson, in the temporal (or ephemeral) body the ‗past registers itself as motor habit‘ (in Guerlac 2006: 126). Bergson divides the notion of memory into two distinct categories, these being ‗automatic‘ and ‗Image‘ memory. The former is what is most relevant in this case as it is considered to be the ‗memory of the body‘ which is ‗produced through repetition and occurs as repetition‘ (ibid) in a habitual sense as opposed to image memory which retains the past in images ‗that carry the mark of the unique moment in which they were lived‘ (ibid: 127). Automatic memory is said to perform the past in the present when a habitual action is repeated (ibid) implying that the movement of the body might itself serve as a trigger to memory. Relating this idea to the archive of performance specifically sheds light upon the archive as an active entity in the sense that ‗the archive does not store: it acts‘ (Lepecki 2010: 2).

These ideas reinforce the idea of tacit knowledge as an archival source and whilst recognising that memory forms an integral role in terms of capturing experiential knowledge it raises questions with regard to reliability and authenticity. Through the phenomenological approaches to the body as outlined within this paper, the body is seen as a ‗minded body‘ (Fraleigh, 1987: 9) rather than a mind in control of a body. As discussed earlier, the dancer‘s experience varies from one body to another according to their individual bodily experiences. Additionally as Merleau-Ponty points out, the body is also ephemeral and it‘s living through space, time and movement calls into question its reliability as an archival source. The field of knowledge management recognises that information must be made explicit in order to provide a tangible knowledge source. However, the ‗invisible qualities‘ (Melrose 2006 available online) of the body, although still recognised to constitute knowledge are not always made explicit and if they are, this must always be done in retrospect. This raises issue with the reliability of memory as the body continues to build its fund of tacit knowledge as it moves through time and space, connected with the changing contexts of the world within which it is placed, and indeed the dance context within which it is placed. Questions can be raised regarding the heritage of the body and indeed bodies. I have referred throughout to a body or the body of dance performance and practice, yet are there greater implications if a collective of bodies are concerned? What does each body remember and how consistent are

each of their experiences. Although each dancer‘s experience and resulting knowledge could be widely varied there is also potential for collective bodies to reveal a congruent indication of heritage which would be of significant value to the understanding of dance as an embodied practice. Through adding multiple bodies to the equation it might be possible to measure the reliability of the body‘s memory (in the sense of automatic/ muscle/ embodied etc.) through establishing consensus and therefore gauging how definite the imprints of experience are. This paper has considered the archive of dance through the lenses of traditional archive theory and notions of embodiment and lived experience. Firstly it has considered archival tradition and common practice and how this relates to the archives of performance practice. Secondly it has recognised the tacit knowledge of the dancing body in particular as an archival source. Through so doing, this paper has raised significant questions with regards to the fact that the archive of performance is not all encompassing as it does not allow for the knowledge generated through the embodied practice of dance. The discussion has negotiated the idea of the body as an archival document and through doing so has exposed the body to be problematic through notions of lived-experience and the complexities of memory. Although it is clear that there is knowledge inherent in the lived body this paper has raised issue with the value of this knowledge especially if it takes the shape of memory. Through considering the memory of the practitioner as the place where knowledge is manifest and the body as a temporal entity, questions are raised regarding the authenticity of this knowledge: how accurate can the body be if this knowledge is to be recalled in retrospect? These ideas also stimulate debate if they are to be placed within the context of the physicality of the body: how accurate can movement and memory be in an ageing body?

Supplementary to this, the discussion has highlighted the fact that the process of acquiring the embodied knowledge of the dance practitioner is not without difficulty. It has raised issue with the ability to access and engage with tacit knowledge types and revealed that further investigation is required into how such knowledge can be transferred and made permanent in order to warrant it worthy of archival preservation. To an extent, the example of how digital technologies are being engaged with to expose pre-performance material demonstrates how the creative process is being made accessible, yet further investigation into the actual archival value of such practise is required. More positively, through the application of ideas relating to the body and its connection with time and space, this paper has revealed that the body is capable of revealing knowledge different to that of the archive as the external record of dance and therefore should be considered capable of contributing new archival dance knowledge.

The question generated from this exploration is what methods we can use to engage with the dancer in order to extract the funds of knowledge from the body and its memory? I intend to pursue this line of questioning through practical methods which engage with the dancer on an individual level. Through interview, log books and video/audio diaries and observation of studio practices I intend to explore the body as an archival document, gaining as much insight into the lived experience of dance as possible through these means.

References

Blom, L and Chaplin, T. (1988). The Moment of Movement: Dance Improvisation. London: Dance Books.

Butcher, R and Melrose, S. (2005). eds. Rosemary Butcher : choreography, collisions and collaborations. Enfield: Middlesex University Press.

Dance Heritage Coalition. (1994). Beyond Memory: Preserving the Documents of Our Dance Heritage [available online].

http://www.danceheritage.org/preservation/beyond.html#intro. Accessed 01/08/2011. Forde, H. (2007). Preserving Archives. London: Facet.

Foster, S. (1997). Dancing Bodies. In Desmond, J.C. (ed). 1997. Meaning in Motion: new Cultural Studies of Dance. 1997. Durham; London: Duke University Press, pp. 235-257. Fraleigh, S. (1987). Dance and the Lived Body. Pittsburgh: University of Pittsburgh Press. ________. (2004). Dancing Identity: Metaphysics in Motion. Pittsburgh: University of

Pittsburgh Press.

Foucault, M. (1977). Discipline and punish: the birth of the prison (translated by Alan Sheridan). London: Allen Lane.

Guerlac, S. (2006). Thinking in time: an introduction to Henri Bergson. London: Cornell University Press.

Hartley, R and Rowley J. (2008). Organizing knowledge: an introduction to managing access to information. (4th ed.)Aldershot: Ashgate.

Merleau-Ponty, M. (1969). The Phenomenology of Perception. London: Routledge.

Lepecki, A. (2010). The body as Archive: The Will to Re-Enact and the Afterlife of Dances in Dance Research Journal; Winter; 42; 2 pp. 28-48.

Melrose, S.(2006). ―Not yet, and already no longer‖: loitering with intent between the expert practitioner at work, and the archive. ResCen, Performance as Knowledge. Wednesday 3 May, The Portico Rooms, Somerset House, London. Available online:

http://www.rescen.net/archive/PaK_may06/PaK06_transcripts4_1.html [accessed 9 February 2011].

________. (2007). Still Harping On (About Expert Practitioner-Centred Modes of

Knowledge and Models of Intelligibility. Keynote Presentation, AHDS Summer School: Digital Representations of Performing Art. National e-Science Centre, Edinburgh, July, pp. 1-22.

Millar, L. (2006). ‗Touchstones: Considering the Relationship Between Memory and Archives. Archivaria Vol. 61, pp 105-126.

_______. (2009). The story behind the book: preserving authors' and publishers' archives. Vancouver: CCSP Press.

Mitra, R. (2009). Embodiment of Memory and the Diasporic Agent in Akram Khan

Company‘s Bahok. In: Counsell, C. & Mock, R. 2009.eds. Performance, Embodiment and Cultural Memory. Newcastle: Cambridge Scholars, pp. 41-58.

Parviainen, J. (1998). Bodies moving and moved: a phenomenological analysis of the dancing subject and the cognitive and ethical values of dance art. Tampere: Tampere University Press.

Peterson Royce, A. (2002). The Anthropology of Dance. Alton: Dance Books.

Pearce Moses, R. 2005. A Glossary of Archival and Records Terminology [Available online]

http://www.archivists.org/glossary/term_details.asp?DefinitionKey=156 [Accessed 7 April 2011].

Phelan, P. (1993). Unmarked: The Politics of Performance. Routledge: New York.

Taylor, D. (2003). The Archive and the Repertoire: Performing Cultural Memory in the Americas. Durham, N.C.; London: Duke University Press.

Sorrell, T. (1999). Descartes. Aldershot: Ashgate.

Taylor, H. Cook, T and Dodds, G. (2003). Eds. Imagining archives: essays and reflections by Hugh A. Taylor. Chicago: Society of American Archivists; Ottawa: Association of Canadian Archivists; Lanham, Md: Scarecrow Press.

Whatley, S. (2008) Archives of the Dance (21): Siobhan Davies Dance Online. Dance Research, Vol. 26.2, Winter, pp. 244-257.

Disco_mbobulated (Mis)reading the Dancefloor through the Medium