The Dance-Language Conflict | Introduction

Language-less communication is the art of dance. The body is the means. The translation relies on familiar human experience. Dance expresses. Dance interacts. Martha Graham says that "dance is the hidden language of the soul." But, let's unpack her claim a little more. How is dance used as language? Is dance language? Or is it something more?

Dance, in this work, refers specifically to contemporary modern dance - that is, the type of modern dance that we see being created today. Modern dance first emerged in history as a breakaway from ballet and traditionalist roles for women in society. Women found liberation in moving authentically, and in independence of being led by a male partner. Modern dance is known for its communicative abilities as an art form, but often do we forget that its development in history is communication in and of itself. As we travel forward through time, we see modern dance shift into a vast fusion of movement and influences. This makes sense, given the way that technology continues to make dance more accessible, and contributes to the exponentially growing popularity of dance in the media and in society. Dance has also developed itself over time as a scholarly and academic pursuit. People study, critique, and question dance. They re-invent it over and over again.

But, let's look more closely at this idea. How do we analyze, critique, and question dance? More often than not, we use language. Very rarely do we commuicate about dance by using dance. And that is because dance does not achieve the same level of specificity that exists in spoken or signed language. It is for this reason, and others, that I argue that dance is not its own language. Though dance is certainly communicative, it cannot thoroughly analyze, argue, or command. It cannot independently describe, critique, or question. It cannot be objectively understood and translated, even within the most exclusive niche of artists. It lacks clear, codified structure, and use of denotation. Surely, language has its own shortcomings, that dance is able to fulfill, but the way that the two serve different communicative purposes defends my point precisely - that dance is not its own language, and we should not treat it as such. By letting go of the notion of dance as a language, we make our art more accessible. We invite people who don't "speak" dance to connect to it. And we stop condensing an art form so complex and personally interpretive to fit the objective and functional structure of true language.