Unplanned Coordination: Ensemble Improvisation as Collective Action

Authors

  • Ali Hasan University of Iowa
  • Jennifer Kayle University of Iowa

Keywords:

collective action, collective intentionality, reductive theories of collective action, social aesthetics, dance, improvisation, ensemble improvisation

Abstract

The characteristic features of ensemble dance improvisation (EDI) make it an interesting case for theories of intentional collective action. These features include the high degree of freedom enjoyed by each individual, and the lack of fixed hierarchical roles, rigid decision procedures, or detailed plans. We present a “reductive” approach to collective action, apply it to EDI, and show how the theory enriches our perspective on this practice. We show, with the help of our theory of collective action, that EDI (as typically practiced) constitutes a significant collective achievement, one that manifests an impressive, spontaneous, jointly cooperative and individually highly autonomous activity that meets demanding aesthetic standards. Its being good in this way is not a mere extrinsic feature of the artwork, but part of its aesthetic value. We end by discussing how this value is easily missed by classic aesthetics, but is revealed by more contemporary frameworks like social aesthetics.

References

Albright, A. C., and D. Gere. 2003. Taken by Surprise: A Dance Improvisation Reader. Middletown, CT: Wesleyan University Press.

Alonso, F. M 2018. “Reductive Views of Shared Intention.” In Routledge Handbook of Collective Intentionality, edited by K, Ludwig, and M, Jankovic. New York, NY: Routledge.10.4324/9781315768571-5

Banes, S. 1994. Writing Dancing in the Age of Postmodernism. Middletown, CT: Wesleyan University Press.

Belgrad, D 2016. “Improvisation, Democracy, and Feedback.” In The Oxford Handbook of Critical Improvisation Studies, edited by G, Lewis, and B, Piekut. Chicago, IL: Oxford University Press.

Blom, L. A., and L. T. Chaplin. 1982. The Intimate Act of Choreography. Pittsburgh, PA: University of Pittsburgh Press.10.2307/j.ctt5hjqp1

Borgo, D 2016. “The Ghost in the Music, or the Perspective of an Improvising Ant.” In The Oxford Handbook of Critical Improvisation Studies, edited by G. E. Lewis, and B. Piekut. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.

Born, G 2017. “After Relational Aesthetics: Improvised Music, the Social, and (Re)Theorizing the Aesthetic.” In Improvisation and Social Aesthetics, edited by G. Born, E. Lewis, and W. Straw. Durham, NC: Duke University Press.10.1215/9780822374015-002

Born, G. E. Lewis, and W. Straw, eds. 2017. Improvisation and Social Aesthetics, Duke University Press.10.1215/9780822374015

Bratman, M. E. 2014. Shared Agency: A Planning Theory of Acting Together. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199897933.001.0001

Buckwalter, M 2010. Composing while Dancing: An Improvisor’s Companion. Madioson, WI: University of Wisconsin Press.

Buss, S., and A. Westlund. 2018. “Personal Autonomy.” In The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, edited by E. N Zalta. URL = https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/spr2018/entries/personal-autonomy/.

Clarke, E. F., and M. Doffman. 2017. Distributed Creativity: Collaboration and Improvisation in Contemporary Music. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.10.1093/oso/9780199355914.001.0001

Fischlin, D., H. Ajay, and L. George. 2013. The Fierce Urgency of Now: Improvisation, Rights, and the Ethics of Cocreation. Durham, NC: Duke University Press.10.2307/j.ctv11smsxm

Foster, S. L. 2002. Dances that Describe Themselves: The Improvised Choreography of Richard Bull. Middletown, CT: Wesleyan University Press.

Gilbert, M. 1989. On Social Facts. New York, NY: Routledge.

Goldman, D. 2010. I Want to Be Ready: Improvised Dance as a Practice of Freedom. Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press.10.3998/mpub.287881

Hagberg, G. 2016. “Ensemble Improvisation, Collective Intention, and Group Attention.” In The Oxford Handbook of Critical Improvisation Studies, edited by G. E. Lewis, and B. Piekut. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.

Humphrey, D., and P. Barbara. 1959. The Art of Making Dances. Hightstown, NJ: Grove Press.

Kutz, C. 2000. “Acting Together.” Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 61 (1): 1–31, https://doi.org/10.2307/2653401.

List, C., and P. Philip. 2011. Group Agency: The Possibility, Design, and Status of Corporate Agents. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199591565.001.0001

Ludwig, K. 2016. From Individual to Plural Agency (Collective Action: Vol. 1). New York: Oxford University Press.10.1093/acprof:oso/9780198755623.003.0001

Manin, B. 1987. “On Legitimacy and Political Deliberation.” Political Theory 15 (3): 338–68, https://doi.org/10.1177/0090591787015003005.

Marks, V 2003. “Against Improvisation.” In Taken by Surprise: A Dance Improvisation Reader, edited by A. Cooper Albright, and D. Gere, 135–9. Middletown, CT: Wesleyan University Press.

National Educational Television and Radio Center at Indiana University. 1966. “Bloomington.” In Dance: Four Pioneers. Bloomington: Indiana University Audio-Visual Center.

Oshana, M. 2003. “How Much Should We Value Autonomy?” Social Philosophy and Policy 20 (2): 99–126, https://doi.org/10.1017/s0265052503202041.

Pateman, C 1970. Participation and Democratic Theory. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9780511720444

Peter, F. 2017. “Political Legitimacy.” In The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Summer 2017 Edition), edited by E. N. Zalta. URL = https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/sum2017/entries/legitimacy/.

Pettit, P 2012. On the People’s Terms. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9781139017428

Pettit, P., and D. Schweikard. 2006. “Joint Actions and Group Agents.” Philosophy of the Social Sciences 36 (1): 18–39, https://doi.org/10.1177/0048393105284169.

Searle, J 1990. “Collective Intentions and Actions.” In Intentions in Communication, edited by P. Cohen, M. Pollack, and J. Morgan, 401–15. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.10.1017/CBO9780511606366.007

Sgorbati, S., C. Emily, and H. Marie. 2013. “Emergent Improvisation: On the Nature of Spontaneous Composition where Dance Meets Science.” Contact Quarterly Dance and Improvisation Journal, Chapbook 4 38 (2).

The Architects. 2010. https://www.architectsdance.org/about (Accessed February 27, 2021).

Tuomela, R. 2005. “We-Intentions Revisited.” Philosophical Studies 125 (3): 327–69, https://doi.org/10.1007/s11098-005-7781-1.

Tuomela, R. 2018. “Non-reductive Views of Shared Intention.” In The Routledge Handbook of Collective Intentionality, edited by K. Ludwig, and M. Jankovic. New York, NY: Routledge.10.4324/9781315768571-4

Westlund, A. C. 2009. “Rethinking Relational Autonomy.” Hypatia 24 (4): 26–49, https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1527-2001.2009.01056.x.

Downloads

Published

2022-03-01

Issue

Section

Articles