(Slo)
Premiki sodobnega plesa II
Maska, Letn. XXIX, št. 163–164 (poletje 2014)
Tematski blok Premiki sodobnega plesa IIv zadnji številki 163–164 (poletje 2014) izhaja iz zelo konkretnega dogodka: leta 2012 je takratna desno usmerjena vlada ukinila Center sodobnih plesnih umetnosti (CSPU), prvi javni zavod na področju sodobnega plesa v Sloveniji. Frustracija, s katero se je takrat soočila slovenska sodobna plesna scena, je med drugim sprožila tudi vprašanja o zgodovinjenju sodobnega plesa. S kakšnim konkretnim gradivom, zgodbami, evidencami in dokazi lahko sodobni ples v Sloveniji sooči politične odločevalce, ki s svojimi politikami koreografirajo zelo občutljive umetniško-kulturne mikroorganizme v kontekstu, v katerem umetniške prakse ne zmorejo delovati brez javne podpore? S čim lahko sodobni ples dokazuje svoj obstoj?
Problem zgodovinjenja sodobnega plesa v Sloveniji je povezan z razmeroma omejenim številom dokumentov in virov, ki bi lahko osvetlili domačo sodobnoplesno zgodbo na nov način, kar je posledica dejstva, da nimamo javne institucije, ki bi skrbela za sistematično zbiranje, sistematiziranje, katalogiziranje in rabo arhivskih virov.
Gradiva, ki jih v svojem neformalnem Začasnem slovenskem plesnem arhivu zbira Rok Vevar, član Maskinega uredništva, predstavljajo poglavitni vir za večinoma faktografske članke, ki evidentirajo posamezne podsisteme, ki tvorijo javni kulturni organizem plesne umetnosti na Slovenskem (kronologija ustanavljanja in ukinitve Centra sodobnih plesnih umetnosti, kratek pregled zgodovine slovenskega plesa ter izobraževanja na tem področju, položaj plesne teorije in kritike skozi čas, status svobodnih kulturnih delavcev in samozaposlenih na področju plesa, genealogija stanovskega Društva za sodobni ples Slovenije ter – nenazadnje – festivalizacija celotnega področja), ponujajo pa tudi kratko interpretacijo prenosa dveh različnih kult(urn)ih (plesnih) paradigem v slovenski prostor, ki sta odloč(il)no zaznamovali ritem institucionalizacije sodobnega plesa v Sloveniji. Maskin forum je tokrat nastal v obliki interne razprave ali okrogle mize, kjer so predstavniki plesne skupnosti z različnih vidikov sondirali trenutno stanje na tem področju.
Amelia Kraigher
Odgovorna urednica Maske
Premiki sodobnega plesa II
Maska, Letn. XXIX, št. 163–164 (poletje 2014)
Tematski blok Premiki sodobnega plesa IIv zadnji številki 163–164 (poletje 2014) izhaja iz zelo konkretnega dogodka: leta 2012 je takratna desno usmerjena vlada ukinila Center sodobnih plesnih umetnosti (CSPU), prvi javni zavod na področju sodobnega plesa v Sloveniji. Frustracija, s katero se je takrat soočila slovenska sodobna plesna scena, je med drugim sprožila tudi vprašanja o zgodovinjenju sodobnega plesa. S kakšnim konkretnim gradivom, zgodbami, evidencami in dokazi lahko sodobni ples v Sloveniji sooči politične odločevalce, ki s svojimi politikami koreografirajo zelo občutljive umetniško-kulturne mikroorganizme v kontekstu, v katerem umetniške prakse ne zmorejo delovati brez javne podpore? S čim lahko sodobni ples dokazuje svoj obstoj?
Problem zgodovinjenja sodobnega plesa v Sloveniji je povezan z razmeroma omejenim številom dokumentov in virov, ki bi lahko osvetlili domačo sodobnoplesno zgodbo na nov način, kar je posledica dejstva, da nimamo javne institucije, ki bi skrbela za sistematično zbiranje, sistematiziranje, katalogiziranje in rabo arhivskih virov.
Gradiva, ki jih v svojem neformalnem Začasnem slovenskem plesnem arhivu zbira Rok Vevar, član Maskinega uredništva, predstavljajo poglavitni vir za večinoma faktografske članke, ki evidentirajo posamezne podsisteme, ki tvorijo javni kulturni organizem plesne umetnosti na Slovenskem (kronologija ustanavljanja in ukinitve Centra sodobnih plesnih umetnosti, kratek pregled zgodovine slovenskega plesa ter izobraževanja na tem področju, položaj plesne teorije in kritike skozi čas, status svobodnih kulturnih delavcev in samozaposlenih na področju plesa, genealogija stanovskega Društva za sodobni ples Slovenije ter – nenazadnje – festivalizacija celotnega področja), ponujajo pa tudi kratko interpretacijo prenosa dveh različnih kult(urn)ih (plesnih) paradigem v slovenski prostor, ki sta odloč(il)no zaznamovali ritem institucionalizacije sodobnega plesa v Sloveniji. Maskin forum je tokrat nastal v obliki interne razprave ali okrogle mize, kjer so predstavniki plesne skupnosti z različnih vidikov sondirali trenutno stanje na tem področju.
Amelia Kraigher
Odgovorna urednica Maske
(En)
Maska, vol. XXIX, No. 163–163 (summer 2014)
The themed section of the Summer 2014 issue of Maskanos. 163-164 – Movements in Contemporary Dance II – is based on a very specific event: in mid-2012 the right-wing government abolished the Centre of Contemporary Dance Arts, the first public institute in the field of contemporary dance in Slovenia. The frustration faced by the Slovenian contemporary dance scene raised several issues, including that of the historisation of contemporary dance in Slovenia. What are the specific materials, stories, records and evidence that contemporary dance in Slovenia can present to decision makers whose policies choreograph very sensitive artistic and cultural microorganisms in a context where artistic practices cannot be implemented without public support? What can contemporary dance use to prove its existence?
The problem of the historisation of contemporary dance in Slovenia is related to a relatively limited number of documents and sources that could shed a new light on the national contemporary dance story and which is the result of the absence of any public institution providing for a systematic collection, systematisation, catalogisation and use of archival sources.
The documents that dance historian, theoretician and member of Maska’seditorial board Rok Vevar collected in his informal Provisional Slovenian Dance Archive are the main source for the articles that record individual subsystems that constitute the public cultural organism of dance art in Slovenia (the chronology of the establishment and abolition of the Centre of Contemporary Dance Arts, a brief overview of the history of Slovenian dance and education in this field, the position of dance theory and criticism through these times, the status of freelance workers in culture and the self-employed in the field of dance, the genealogy of the Contemporary Dance Association Slovenia as the rank organisation and – last but not least – the festivalisation of the entire field), but also offer a short interpretation of the transfer of two different cult(ural) (dance) paradigms to the Slovenian space, which made a decisive impact on the pace of institutionalisation of contemporary dance in Slovenia. The present Maska forum is based on internal and round table discussions, where representatives of the dance community examined the current situation in this field from different perspectives.
Amelia Kraigher
Maska, editor-in-chief
Movements in Contemporary Dance II
Maska, vol. XXIX, No. 163–163 (summer 2014)
The themed section of the Summer 2014 issue of Maskanos. 163-164 – Movements in Contemporary Dance II – is based on a very specific event: in mid-2012 the right-wing government abolished the Centre of Contemporary Dance Arts, the first public institute in the field of contemporary dance in Slovenia. The frustration faced by the Slovenian contemporary dance scene raised several issues, including that of the historisation of contemporary dance in Slovenia. What are the specific materials, stories, records and evidence that contemporary dance in Slovenia can present to decision makers whose policies choreograph very sensitive artistic and cultural microorganisms in a context where artistic practices cannot be implemented without public support? What can contemporary dance use to prove its existence?
The problem of the historisation of contemporary dance in Slovenia is related to a relatively limited number of documents and sources that could shed a new light on the national contemporary dance story and which is the result of the absence of any public institution providing for a systematic collection, systematisation, catalogisation and use of archival sources.
The documents that dance historian, theoretician and member of Maska’seditorial board Rok Vevar collected in his informal Provisional Slovenian Dance Archive are the main source for the articles that record individual subsystems that constitute the public cultural organism of dance art in Slovenia (the chronology of the establishment and abolition of the Centre of Contemporary Dance Arts, a brief overview of the history of Slovenian dance and education in this field, the position of dance theory and criticism through these times, the status of freelance workers in culture and the self-employed in the field of dance, the genealogy of the Contemporary Dance Association Slovenia as the rank organisation and – last but not least – the festivalisation of the entire field), but also offer a short interpretation of the transfer of two different cult(ural) (dance) paradigms to the Slovenian space, which made a decisive impact on the pace of institutionalisation of contemporary dance in Slovenia. The present Maska forum is based on internal and round table discussions, where representatives of the dance community examined the current situation in this field from different perspectives.
Amelia Kraigher
Maska, editor-in-chief