Dance as Historical Discourse: Forsythe, Foucault, Brecht, and the BBC

On Wednesday 28th January, Dr Helena Hammond (Senior Lecturer in Dance at the University of Roehampton) gave a very interesting paper entitled ‘Dance as Historical Discourse: Forsythe, Foucault, Brecht, and the BBC’ as part of the Futures of History: cake and theory seminar series held by the Centre for the Philosophy of History at St Mary’s University. Twickenham.

See here for an interview with Dr Hammond on performative histories.
dr-helena-hammond-23Beginning with, and responding to, Historian Robert Rosenstone’s comment that:

“While professional historians continue, with but a few exceptions, to write in a highly traditional manner, some little-known filmmakers and videographers have begin to create a kind of history that we can truly label postmodern, producing works that provide a distinctly new relationship to […] the traces of the past.” (Rosenstone, 1995, 201-2)

Dr Hammond’s paper investigated dance as a possible alternative praxis for historical representation. Helena explored how William Forsythe’s ballet Steptext, performed by the Royal Ballet at the Royal Opera House in 1997 just before its closure for renovation, generated new strategies for exploring or reading the relationship between the Royal Ballet and its institutional home at the Royal Opera House.

After showing an 8-minute clip of the BBC recording of this performance of Steptext as an introduction to the work, Helena outlined the theoretical framework she would use to explore the relationship between the Royal Ballet and the Royal Opera House employing some of the key ideas of Foucault, and notions of Brechtian critique. She then explored how Forsythe, influenced by his reading of Foucault has over the past few decades worked “to reconceive ballet as the vehicle for staging a certain kind of new, iconoclastic history” (Hammond, 2013, 125). In particular she argued that Steptext, through its narrative rupture, worked to unsettle and disturb ballet’s embodiment of institutional history.

Helena discussed how Steptext and also the BBC’s coverage of the 1997 performance worked to dismantle the tradition of ballet and audiences’ preconceptions through a juxtaposition of the performance of Steptext with footage of the pre-show ceremonial performances by the front of house staff and audiences, and images of the cranes that were poised to begin the remodeling of the Royal Opera House. Helena then went on to explore why the Royal Ballet, rather than the Royal Opera was so suitable a vehicle for staging such a Brechtian critique of a quintessential British institution. In answering this question Helena argued that it was the highly feminised identity and liminality that has been imposed on the Royal Ballet in a post-war British arts culture that meant that it was able to fulfill such a role. She contended that although the Royal Ballet was certainly an integral part of the Arts Council cultural establishment its feminised or subaltern status enabled it to be read as analogous to the marginalized, female characters who articulate estrangement in Brechtian theatre. She then outlined a new feminist history of post-war British ballet through this perspective focusing on how despite being financially self-supporting (unlike its sibling the Royal Opera) the Royal Ballet was, to a large extent, perceived as marginal and subservient to the Royal Opera, to the extent that the artistic director of the Royal Ballet although answerable to the Royal Opera House’s board of directors, was excluded from discussions. The ballet toured extensively, yet were excluded from the decision-making process to the extent that scheduled ballet dates were frequently changed.

After the paper there was an interesting discussion followed by tea and home made cakes.

For those interested in the topic, there are a number of suggested books for further reading:

Robert A. Rosenstone “The Future of the Past: film and the beginnings of postmodern history,” in Vivian Sobchack (ed.), The Persistence of History: Cinema, Television and the Modern Event, (London: Routledge, 1995) 201-18.

Helena Hammond, “Dancing against History: (The Royal) Ballet, Forsythe, Foucault, Brecht and the BBC,” Dance Research 31.2 (2013), 120-143.


Centre for Philosophy of History welcomes Prof. Alun Munslow


Following the launch of the Centre for Philosophy of History at St Mary’s University College, Twickenham earlier this year, recently appointed Professorial Research Fellow Alun Munslow talks about his new role.

“Can I say ‘thank you’ for the invitation to join the Centre for the Philosophy of History. My welcome has been very warm and colleagues have quickly smoothed my path – even to sorting out which trains to catch to get me to and from Euston! I shall certainly do what I can to make the Centre a key feature in the landscape of history thinking and practice in the UK and further afield. The initiative of staff is splendid and funding by the University College is far sighted. I am convinced that the Centre will quickly establish itself as a major UK and international focus for advanced thinking on both the theory and practice of history.” Prof Alun Munslow.

The Centre launched in September and is a hub for organising conferences, workshops and seminars whilst providing a base for recruiting postgraduate research students, as well as for making regular applications for external research funding.

Student Review of the Opening of the Centre for the Philosophy of History

Centre-OpeningLydia Birch reviews the opening of the Centre for the Philosophy of History at St Mary’s University College

On my way to the lecture, I have to admit I was especially sceptical about the post-modernist view of history and believed entirely that I would always remain a constructionist historian. Having had numerous cups of coffee, which I thought was essential so that I could pay attention, I sat down. After spilling coffee all down my front, Prof Alun Munslow, one of the lead thinkers in post-modernist history, began his lecture and whilst taking notes I started to become lost in his theory of history and the idea that there is no history in the past, there is only the past and history is what we make it today. Before, this had always seemed as a radical approach to me because throughout my education, history had always been a solid and definite subject, but Prof Munslow made me question this in a way which I had never approached before. After five minutes of being in the lecture I realised that the coffee was not necessary at all because the theory was incredibly endearing and engaging, it was a thrill to listen to this anti-narrative theory of history.MunslowProf Munslow touched on the idea that historians turn the past into a narrative and it was the imagination of historians that turn something that didn’t exist into existing, and as a result of doing this the history went from being fact into story. Thus creating the suspicion that there is no certainty anywhere, and I started to doubt something that had always been cemented fact in my mind, that the study of history is actually the study of historians and their judgements. He argued that not all history is fact because we will never be able to produce an exact representation of the past. Overall, my scepticism at the beginning seems completely irrational, and this lecture simply made me look at history in a completely new light, it leaves you with the question what it is to be studying history? And why would you study history?

Lydia Birch

Centre Launch

centre-opening-blog-1On Tuesday 1st October our new Centre was officially launched. A number of very eminent philosophers and theorists of history had agreed to give short papers and participate in a Q&A session, but before the talks began there was time for a sandwich lunch and some refreshment. At 1pm after some introductory words by Head of the School of Arts and Humanities Prof Lance Pettitt and myself, the event began with a fascinating paper by Prof Alun Munslow. This was followed by a Q&A session where Alun and Prof Keith Jenkins expertly fielded a variety of questions asked by the audience including some by our students.CakeThere was then a short break to cut the cake (expertly iced by Pauline) after which Dr Glenn Richardson awarded Graeme Ancient the Kenneth Breen Memorial Prize for History. We were pleased that the winner of the prize in 2012 (Sam Spranger) and the 2013 winner Graeme were both present at the launch. In fact the participation in the day by so many of our students was a highlight for us. The day concluded with very interesting papers by Martin Davies and Prof Nur Masalha who from different perspectives explored the intersection of politics and history. After the official close of proceedings a number of us retired to the Dolcé Vita Cafe for more cake and animated discussion. We would like to thank everyone who not only made the day such an enjoyable event, but also those people who have provided guidance and support in the establishment of the centre.Claire

History as Wonder


Professor Marnie Hughes-Warrington, vice-chancellor at the Australian National University in Canberra, and well-known theorist made space in her very busy schedule to stop by St Mary’s University College and give the first paper in the newly formed Centre for the Philosophy of History seminar series last Thursday 12th September. Her paper was entitled History as Wonder and explored the role wonder could have in the making of history. It ranged from Bulgarian dwarfs employed by Mediterranean pirates to sink ships, to unsuccessful 19th century world histories, Aristotle, Foucault and hysteria.

The paper marks the start of a new research project/book in which Marnie wants to explore the notion of wonder as a means of destabilizing not only how we conceive of history but also how we think about the theory of history. Marnie is the author of many books including History Goes to the Movies (2007), ‘How Good an Historian Shall I Be?’: R. G. Collingwood, the Historical Imagination and Education (2003); and Fifty Key Thinkers on History (third edition expected 2014). Her latest book Revisionist Histories (2013), through a series of case studies looking at graphic novels, websites, marginalia in library books, and wall murals, explores how authors and audiences are constantly involved in the rewriting of history and are therefore active participants in the construction of historical meanings. Just as in the paper she gave last week, she also considers the ethical implications of this for historiography and historical discourse in general. Marnie is one of the external affiliates of the Centre for the Philosophy of History and it was lovely to finally meet her in person.

See here for an interview with Marnie Hughes-Warrington about her new project