Nietzsche's Looming Presence in the 1930s Dance Polemics of John Martin and Lincoln Kirstein

IF 0.3 3区 艺术学 0 DANCE
Rachel Straus
{"title":"Nietzsche's Looming Presence in the 1930s Dance Polemics of John Martin and Lincoln Kirstein","authors":"Rachel Straus","doi":"10.3366/drs.2021.0342","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Some of the most perplexingly antagonistic comments about the differences between modern dance and ballet can be found strewn throughout the works of two pioneering twentieth-century American dance writers: John Martin (1893–1985) –  The New York Times's first permanent dance critic, champion of modern dancers and early supporter of Martha Graham ( Kisselgoff et al. 1988 : 44) – and Lincoln Kirstein (1907–1996), the prodigious author, impresario, and balletomane, who cofounded with George Balanchine the New York City Ballet. Looming behind a significant number of Martin's and Kirstein's appraisals and condemnations of modern dance and ballet are Friedrich Nietzsche's aesthetics, particularly his Apollonian-Dionysian conceptualisations. This essay investigates the reception of Nietzsche in the context of the 1930s writing of these two dance critics, particularly in respect to their treatment of gender. Foundational for this essay's development are the analyses of Nietzsche's reception by earlier twentieth-century dance figures in the works of Susan Jones (2013 , 2010 ), Susan Manning (2006) and Kimerer LaMothe (2006) .","PeriodicalId":42392,"journal":{"name":"Dance Research","volume":"1 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.3000,"publicationDate":"2021-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Dance Research","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3366/drs.2021.0342","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"艺术学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"DANCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Some of the most perplexingly antagonistic comments about the differences between modern dance and ballet can be found strewn throughout the works of two pioneering twentieth-century American dance writers: John Martin (1893–1985) –  The New York Times's first permanent dance critic, champion of modern dancers and early supporter of Martha Graham ( Kisselgoff et al. 1988 : 44) – and Lincoln Kirstein (1907–1996), the prodigious author, impresario, and balletomane, who cofounded with George Balanchine the New York City Ballet. Looming behind a significant number of Martin's and Kirstein's appraisals and condemnations of modern dance and ballet are Friedrich Nietzsche's aesthetics, particularly his Apollonian-Dionysian conceptualisations. This essay investigates the reception of Nietzsche in the context of the 1930s writing of these two dance critics, particularly in respect to their treatment of gender. Foundational for this essay's development are the analyses of Nietzsche's reception by earlier twentieth-century dance figures in the works of Susan Jones (2013 , 2010 ), Susan Manning (2006) and Kimerer LaMothe (2006) .
尼采在20世纪30年代约翰·马丁和林肯·柯斯坦的舞蹈论战中的隐现
关于现代舞和芭蕾之间的差异,一些最令人困惑的对立评论可以在两位20世纪美国先锋舞蹈作家的作品中找到:约翰·马丁(1893-1985)——《纽约时报》的第一位永久舞蹈评论家,现代舞者的拥护者和玛莎·格雷厄姆的早期支持者(Kisselgoff et al. 1988);44)和林肯·科尔斯坦(1907-1996),他是杰出的作家、导演和芭蕾舞演员,与乔治·巴兰钦共同创建了纽约市芭蕾舞团。在马丁和科尔斯坦对现代舞蹈和芭蕾的大量评价和谴责背后,隐隐隐约地隐藏着弗里德里希·尼采的美学,尤其是他的阿波罗-酒神概念。这篇文章调查了尼采在20世纪30年代这两位舞蹈评论家的写作背景下的接受情况,特别是关于他们对性别的处理。本文发展的基础是分析20世纪早期苏珊·琼斯(2013、2010)、苏珊·曼宁(2006)和基默尔·拉莫特(2006)作品中舞蹈人物对尼采的接受。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
0.40
自引率
0.00%
发文量
9
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信