The Alan Sondheim Mail Archive

April 3, 2006

Dance in the light of Badiou's event

A night-dictation event.

Dance events in the sense of being unprecedented, unaccountable, un- 
called-for. Its arrival is then allied in this sense to the digital, its 
appearance, its evanescence, simultaneously that of the analogic, its 
carrying out, its production within the body as the analogic. Just as the 
dance is simultaneously analogic, incapable of reproduction, incapable of 
recuperation (of the reproduction of the real). Just as the dance is that, 
it is also of the digital, in the sense of the body pressed against a 
second body, or the body pressed against the pull of gravity as an other 
body, or an other body, the dance is a dialectic between the two of them, 
but reduced or scraped in a sense by these two barriers which remain on 
the literal scale, irrepressible, so that a dance exists _there,_ within 
_that_ - simultaneous lewdness and de/production. Cohen's set theory of 
the continuum hypothesis accompanies this, 1 in the choice of hypothesis - 
any way decided - a decision somewhere being made - neither true nor false 
- can't be reproduced to that - but on the other hand a digital situation, 
choice or no choice - all of this is in relation with the Schroedinger cat 
paradox - in the sense of a collapse to a choice - although re: the cat, 
the choice is simply by virtue of the collapse - in dance the choice is by 
virtue of the choice - nonetheless a kind of forcing into one or another 
position - in a sense you can say with the continuum hypothesis - the 
continuum is produced as an alterity, an other order of things - or 
absorbed within the former order - within one or another order - in one 
case it produces itself as a horizon and in another case it is literally 
itself part of a spectrum of possibilities - perhaps in both cases part of 
a spectrum of possibilities. So we relate this to the dance - consider set 
theory in this sense as a allegiance to dance or dance as an allegiance to 
set theory.

In its inertness, in its inertness, the dance remains sexualized. In this 
I disagree presumably with Badiou - it is always already sexualized - the 
body that is dancing is not the neutral body of Cunningham, but is a 
sexual body from which Cunningham creates a state of lassitude or with- 
drawal, decathexis - an almost=neurasthenic state of neutrality which only 
exists in relation to the sexuality of the body within the dance, within 
the Cunningham-dance. Furthermore the sexed body may not be a divisive 
body, that is it need not be that which is binary or divided to one and an 
other, by calling it polymorphic, not polymorphic-perverse but polymorph- 
ic-heterological, a whole spectrum of sexualizations, desires, always 
already plurality, which may not be specified according to one or another 
anatomical distress, one or another positioning of the anatomical.

Initially one might say that dance is the interiority of the metaphysical, 
and if we pursue this, we can speak of dance as an interiority - of which 
the audience is only a (secondary) residue (just as the style of the dance 
is a secondary narcissistic panoply) - the audience is already an institu- 
tionalization, already a production by capital, by the organization of 
labor. The dance however is something else - the injury of the dancer - 
the injured dancer - guarantees that something else that dance is.

One might consider the dance as a projection or reproduction within the 
audience. Thus for example if one plays guitar there is a sort of mimesis 
within, listening to another play. So the body of the dancer is within the 
body of the audience because both of them are involved in movement which 
only becomes itself. There is also the issue of accomplishment. In 
watching the dance, one is always watching accomplishment, that is, a 
certain level, regime, of preparation is necessary for any sort of 
production - that the regime or preparation for the external audience is 
one that always emphasizes an external perfection. In other words the 
limbs continuously arranged and rearranged in such-and-such a way 
according to the exigencies of the dancer generally in dialectic with the 
choreography. However even in situations like these, one might say that 
dance succeeds only by virtue of the interiority of the dancing, only by 
virtue of desire, desire bifurcated into sexuality, desire to produce, to 
perform, to twist the body in such a way, or desire which becomes muted, 
mitigated, by a kind of meditation in which the body even for the dancer 
becomes something else which is the dancer, and which transports him or 
her, accordingly.

What is irritating, elsewhere, to critique, is the muteness of the dance 
in relation to all of this which gets back to all of this, to the 
beginning, to the inconceivabiity of recuperation, reproduction, for dance 
is mute, stet, shtut, nonsense, in a sense, as if that's all, as if 
nothing more. The most primary of arts, the body itself within the body, 
and the most secondary of arts, that it is dependent upon the body, that 
it exists in such-and-such a form only as long as such-and-such a body 
exists, the body of that particular dancer in relationship to that partic- 
ular choreography, that particular moment in time.

So not only injury inhabits dance, but death as well, the two inextricably 
intertwined, one without the other is unthinkable, and both within the 
dance remain unthought.

The Absolute Choreography of the Dance of the Dead

[The recording that plays forever is immobilized, inert, in-subject. The 
recording that plays one/One forever.]

The body of the dancer lies supine, breathless.
The body of the dancer slipped past consciousness, immobile.
Forever, the body of the dancer, stasis of the body. 
Slow irrevocable disappearance of the softer organs of the body.
The pose in situ.

Perfect, recuperable choreography. 
For every death of the softer death of the buried body. 
An unalterable choreography: an uttered choreography.
For only the choreography of the dead is utterable.

And there is no other of the other of the choreography of the dead.
And there is no other choreography of the dead.

---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Mon, 3 Apr 2006 07:16:21 -0400 (GMT-04:00)
Subject: ...

On Wednesday of next week, at two minutes and three seconds after 1:00
in the morning, the time and date will be 01:02:03 04/05/06.

w/ Foofwa d'Imobilite and Alan Sondheim, spoken voices.
Thanks to everyone for their editorial suggestions!

"precisely because dance is trivial"

Generated by Mnemosyne 0.12.