1. An expanded choreography owns the future. Dance as we know it is soon, if not already as dead as opera or dixieland jazz. The future belongs to choreography but only if it acknowledges its potentiality as an expanded capacity. Choreography is not the art of making dances (a directional set of tools), it is a generic set of capacities to be applied to any kind of production, analysis or organization.<\/p>\n
2. Choreography is not the art of making dances, it\u2019s a complex means of approaching the world. No, the universe.<\/p>\n
3. If we live in a society of performance it\u2019s structural foundation is choreography.<\/p>\n
4. In a society based on circulation of abstract values instead of material goods, movement and relations are King, not oil and steel.<\/p>\n
5. In a society organized around immaterial labor, movement is the protagonist. This might not be a good thing, but since there is no choice we better make sure not to leave the definition of those movements to politicians or bureaucrats.<\/p>\n
6. In a society where the subject is the individuals\u2019 most precious property, dance should appreciate its capacity for the impersonal.<\/p>\n
7. Dance is always activating forms of performativity, but dance is not the same as performance.<\/p>\n
8. There is an important difference between political on the level of content and on the level of production. There is an important difference between political on the level of representation and on the level of choice. There is an important difference between political on the level of representation and on the term of sensation, experience or sensuality.<\/p>\n
9. Discourse is neither good or bad, it is the position and timing of it that can open or close contexts. Discourse is not equal to theory or Western reason, discourse is any kind of consistency of information flow or communication. It is not discourse as such that needs to be fought but it\u2019s guardians.<\/p>\n
10. For dance to have a future it needs to engage in a process of deskilling, i.e. to cancel the proprietary understanding of technique in favor of individual or context specific constructions of abilities, over the generic sense of dance as a sui generis technology.<\/p>\n
11. The 20th century had star architects building monuments over a Fordism that was already dead, the future will have star choreographers organizing revolutions, one after the other. The coming insurrection will not be semiotic but will grow and gain strength through proximities between bodies, between spirits, between dances.<\/p>\n
12. The problem is not the split between mind and body, nor between body and mind, not even between minds, the real problem is the split between bodies and bodies, and we don\u2019t just mean human bodies \u2013 we mean any bodies: stones, lions, skin lotion, a little wind, an encyclopedia and so on. The dance of the future must leave the human body behind and embrace all bodies independently and pursue and object oriented contact choreography. Fuck BMC because of its belief in anthropocentricity.<\/p>\n
13. Once we had bodies without organs, in the future we will dance together through a conviviality without communality.<\/p>\n
14. The rebirth of the new as well as the death of the new is nothing new, yet if we want the future to move we must embrace both newing and the new. This embrace starts as a struggle, the struggle against belonging. The new dance has a job, to betray it\u2019s ancestors.<\/p>\n
15. Politics is organized through the qualitative difference of perspectives. The maintenance of politics depends on the degree of transparence, hence the fear of corruption. The production of the political on the other hand denies perspective and insists on the horizon, it must be corruptive exactly in order to undermine the maintenance of politics and hence it fucks transparence.
\nA dance that has ambitions reaching further than \u201cnice\u201d, must be 360 degrees, ungrounding, oblique and motherfuckin true to the universe.<\/p>\n
16. An idea, at least in dance and art, is not hard enough as long as having it doesn\u2019t scare you to death. An idea that is not completely psychotic is not worth while pursuing.<\/p>\n
17. Remember, policy or cultural politics is not Politics, and is certainly not art. Remember critique is not necessarily a proposition. Remember to be an erotic being that engages in the world through sex rather than economy.<\/p>\n
By the way tomorrow or today Friday Spangbergianism The Show at Het Veem Theater in Amsterdam, like 20.30. I\u2019ll be the last release event ever \u2013 or almost \u2013 cuz the book is gone there are no more copies left in the storage and it\u2019s time to start writing part II. The cute and cuddly version, or as a magical friend proposed \u201ca theoretical deliriuum, or rather \u2014 a full blown exercise of Spangeberginism aimed at theory, pure theory\u201d \u2013 OK Smokey I start now, goddamnit.<\/p>\n
http:\/\/spangbergianism.wordpress.com\/2012\/09\/<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
1. An expanded choreography owns the future. Dance as we know it is soon, if not already as dead as opera or dixieland jazz. The future belongs to choreography but only if it acknowledges its potentiality as an expanded capacity. … Continue reading