Wk.7 ~ Dance and Transgression

What is transgression? When does it occur? And how is it related to dance?

These questions were at the heart of this week's lecture - and truthfully, also at the centre of my mind over the past week.

Transgression can be seen as the crossing of boundaries - boundaries that have been set by society, one's culture, one's religious affiliations, or one's personal ideas and ethics, or boundaries that are physical. This is discussed in in Chris Jenks's, who argues that transgression is more than the mere pushing of boundaries or conventions, rather it is "a deeply reflexive act of denial and affirmation" [Jenks 2003:2]. It is part of human nature to inflict and impose limits on ourselves and those around us, thus, in today's modern society where life is defined more by what it is not than what it is, the desire to transgress and these confines and limits becomes ever more pervasive - hence the use of the term 'denial', we deny that these confines are put in place and may at times choose to ignore them completely. But why 'affirmation'? Jenks argues that our desire to transgress ultimately leads to the understanding of why we need these limits and thus reaffirms and stabilises them [see Jenks 5-7].
James E.Gibson [1991] then, leads us to the question of the link between transgression and art. Basing his work for a large part on Nietzsche's writing on ritual and the duality of terror and ecstasy which leads to "intoxication" [p.3] (or ritual transgression), Gibson proposes that, as in ritual, transgression is possible in the arts - thus also dance - and that it is necessary for a healthy society as it can "serve as the impetus for healing transformation"[see p.11-12].

Tying this in with Elisabeth Kirtsoglou's [2004] article on the Greek phenomena of the parea (an all female society or friendship group) is interesting. The parea is a group which celebrates femaleness - in all intends and purposes they have a somewhat feministic stance in that they initiate new group members by their presence, their ability to dance, to drink, to be heard, and to have sexual experiences - they basically see themselves as greater than society in that societal norms of behaviour do not apply to them. Thus, the parea is a transgression in itself - it's very beliefs clash with those of society. Thus, if we take Gibson's argument, the parea is necessary in society in order to avoid 'untimely stagnation' - the parea enables each and every female initiate to transgress - but if we take Jenks's idea of affirmation we would be led to believe that every initiate realises the necessity of the boundaries they are pushing - is this true? I don't know, but I do think that the idea of the parea enables many women to satisfy a part of themselves that is usually suppressed.

The idea of same sex relations (as seen in the parea) always posses a site of controversy in most societies. Coming from a country and culture where homosexuality and bisexuality is part and parcel of everyday life, it has become unthinkable to me that people remain to have a problem with this.
My brother has been happily married for over two years to his partner - a homosexual man from Poland. Every New Year's eve the family would go to a gala dinner-dance where dancing almost serves as a 'palate cleanser' after every course - my brother is a fabulous dancer (he was the first to teach me the chachacha when I was a young girl), but now that he is married he has not been able to enjoy these evenings as he is not able to dance with his husband - this to me doesn't seem right.
Why should people be seen as 'in the wrong' on 'not acting sociably' when they want to dance with their spouse? Why should it matter that it is two males dancing rather than a male and female?
But for reasons far beyond my reach it is unfortunately the case. Same sex dancing is seen as a 'transgression' - it is breaking the rules of social etiquette.
Even though same sex dancing has become permitted in many societies today, it is usually permitted in a specifically designated area - a gay club, or a same sex dance competition - highlighting to me that it still has not become accepted.
But having said that, it is not uncommon to see a group of women together on a dance floor - what is this social stigma we have against men dancing together? why is it a transgression for men to dance together (even in a group), and less so for women? Does the type of dancing make a difference?

Funnily enough, our salsa class falls within this category - there being only one male and numerous females has led to most of us dancing with another female. Is this a transgression? well for me it isn't - although it brings with it issues of body movement and such, but overall there does not seem to be a problem. Now I wonder, would this be the same if the situation had been reversed? I very much doubt it.

Speaking of transgression - I attended a Capoeira workshop this week - something I have always wanted to do. Having some experience of kickboxing behind me the movements of martial arts are not completely foreign to me, however there were certain moves that most definitely required me to overcome some physical boundaries - a fear of those perceived boundaries and the breaking of them led to a great sense of self, a sense of potential capabilities perhaps.