I have not find the significant why but I think it is necessary to discuss pop dances, traditional dance form and theatrical dance form separately especially in relation to this issue of ‘copycat’. Even better if we can reference them to a specific culture or context. I suppose it is a bit early for us to generalise how we perceive ‘dance’ if it is not a subject that already has common understanding and notably dance changes according to time and space.
To popularise a dance/movement/form, we make it visible, learnable and repeatable. That’s the purpose and that’s the way, regardless it is a traditional or contemporary piece. So if the intention is merely to wide spread, the action of duplication is expected. Rightful or not is another topic perhaps determined by law or ethic. Copy or imitation other people’s classwork or choreography is usually acceptable if it is for own personal knowledge or to enhance individual skill. Any idea beyond this intention bring suspicion. Fair enough.
In another scenario when we tend to preserve a dance form, we possibly go through codification, documentation, systemic teaching or even examination. Understanding the context/concept is ideal and necessary, although in many cases only the steps and the exterior elements of dance have been passed on due to convenience (or negligent sometimes). Duplication is usually required in order to retain as much as possible. If not, imitation or reconstruction is practiced in order to suit the local context. From time to time, there are people seeking elements of creativity or contemporaneous on some traditional forms. How to justify and how to find balance, it is indeed a complicate and controversial process that probably require a few generations to work out.
If we’re specifically talking about creativity or innovation in choreography, imitation may not be something to focus because obviously the aims are different. We have a number of dance competitions in the country that promote ‘conservation of traditional dance and/or culture’, however they are using quite different tactic. For example, some encourage new choreography that has minimal similarity with the traditional form whereas some accept imitation or reorganising of existing dance piece/forms. I am not surprise to hear dispute and contrasting arguments because by far not many of us has sit down to seriously discuss the rationality, the effectiveness or impact of these tactics in the development of dance (education). Relying on conclusion of individual judges or committees are sometimes insufficient. I believe it takes not less than the whole community to negotiate for an agreement, if we were to call it ‘our dance’.
Going back to the issue of copycat. Universal title like ‘choreographer’ does not inform one’s level of creativity (e.g. 100% / 50% / 0% effort of originality), or how skilled this person is. Paying respect and giving credits to original works show only manners, it reflects one’s professional conduct. I suppose if we have intention to imitate or copy a dance piece or steps, we must have sensibly evaluated the how, the cost and the risk, and be responsible to all our decisions. Also note that, we copy is never because audiences want to see it, it’s only because we want to do so – despite how awesome and beautiful the dance is. Let’s remind each other again why ‘creative industry’ exist, shouldn’t we? J
Sorry for the long-winded message. I am just talking from my limited knowledge and experience that may not be inclusive, but I’m willing to learn more from here. Cheers~
