KK: Can you tell me a little bit about yourself as an artist and thinker? What is your practice? You’ve had an interesting trajectory! 

MG:  Thank you Kathleen.  I am an Interdisciplinary Artist;  a Dance Musician, Technologist, Developer and Theorist and I work within all contexts of Modern, Post Modern and Experimental Dance.  I found out at the beginning of my professional career as a Musician, soon after I was introduced to Modern Dance and all that it entailed, that I was only inspired by Human Movement, and nothing else, and the extensive theoretical developments that Modern Dance had undergone during the 20th Century provided a comprehensive Experimental Environment for me, where I could combine many of my interests and remain inspired and creative and hence my work in Dance now going on about 35 + years.  I also follow the now extensive Dance Music lineage that began with Dance Musician Louis Horst and his work during the seminal stages of Modern Dance, continued and added on to by the likes of Lou Harrison, John Cage, Pia Gilbert, Lucia Dlugoszewski, Robert Ellis Dunn, Katherine Teck and other “Horst Modal Musicians” (Image 1) and colleagues through a ‘Maximum Engagement Format’, a comprehensive, symbiotic relationship with Dance, engaging with, inspired by, and contributing to all aspects of this ongoing relationship.

KK:  It seems that so many folks who find their way into the Dance Technology realm also come from a music perspective (I’m thinking of Mark Coniglio and John Toenjes off the top of my head). 

MG:  As you know, Dance, in any manifestation of its identity, is inherently a multidisciplinary artform, and Modern Dance, with the critical theoretical developments it underwent during the 20th Century provided a comprehensive experimental platform where by the 1980’s and 1990’s, every aspect of this identity had been explored at various levels by various people.  However, while the Dance ‘Instrument’ throughout the 20th Century, as it had for thousands of years prior, still remained the Kinesthetic Body with movement at its creative core, Music and Musicians, as you know, needed additional ‘Instruments’ for their work. Developments in 20th Century Music, like Serialism, Post Serialism, Music Concrete, Minimalism, Electro- Acoustic and Electronic Music etc. supported further experiments with Sound, Found Sounds, Tape, Music Synthesizers, Computer Music, Music Programming Languages etc. Dance Musicians began incorporating these experimental thinkings, tools and technologies into their work in Dance, keeping in mind that Dance Musicians interacted with every aspect of Dance.   

John Cage was one of the earliest, going as far back as his composition, while a Dance Musician at Cornish College Dept. of Dance in Seattle, for Undergraduate Student Syvilla Fort (who goes on to Dance professionally with Katherine Dunham later) which, besides an early reflection of Cage’s genius, was equally foretelling of the Experimental Environment that Modern Dance would go on to provide him and many of us Dance Musicians for years to come. Much of his later thoughts on technology however occurred in contexts of the Cunningham environment, but his work in the late 1960’s with a few of the Judson Choreographers and their collaborations with Bell Labs Engineers during ‘9 Evenings of Theater and Engineering’, (Image 2) was a significant event for Dance. It was, if anything, a flexing of its Multidisciplinary Muscle, if you will, following by the work during Experiments in Art and Technology (E.A.T) in the late 60’s and early 70’s. Trisha Brown’s use of Projectors in her work is another example. (Image 3)

Hence by the 80’s, Dance was now armed with the infusion of the theoretical developments from Post-Modern Dance. With the development of MIDI (Music Instruments Digital Interface) and early computers, Computer Music Labs began appearing in Dance Programs in Higher Education by the early 1990’s, where many of my Dance Musician colleagues (including John Toenjes) and I, did our early thinkings and work on Dance Technologies, Computer Music, Physical Computing applications in Dance, etc.  

By the mid to late 1990’s, Musician Mark Coniglio, with his work in the Dance Company Troika Ranch, addressed that next logical step, that need, in the technological evolution in Dance contexts with his development of the Software ISADORA (Appropriate title!!) which provided both the affirmation of the need and the conduit for further experiments, supported by history, that the field of Dance and Dancers themselves were ready to now explore other aspects of their Multidisciplinary identity utilizing New Technology Tools very much like what you and your contemporaries are doing now. 

So, the history and timeline of how Dance Musicians got into Dance Technology, including, by the very nature of our involvement with all aspects of Dance, was really about critically providing Dancers that initial “safe space” to experiment with Technology.

KK: Can you tell me about the Open Source Dance Methodology and the APTAR process? How did you develop them, and how do you see them employed?

MG: Having observed the struggles many Dancers faced immediately upon leaving college, initially through Dancer friends, then from Students and former students during my time at SUNY Brockport in the 90’s and then U. of Minnesota Dance program in the 00’s (a much smaller Dance program than Brockport’s), it was quite evident to me that not all programs in Dance academia provided the same education, staff, tools and resources, but in the Professional Dance world, the realities were the same across the board, everywhere. I saw that the greatest drop-off rate from career aspirations came from the first 2-3 years immediately upon graduation from college. The obstacles to establishing a career were just too many, and as you know, unless a Dancer made it into a dance company, went for further education, put together a bunch of dance teaching jobs, or found performance opportunities, dancers were forced to rely on non-dance jobs to make a living, Dancers didn’t have the time to dance, leading to many changing career trajectories. Hence the development of The Open Source Dance Methodology [OSD], a free 2-year multidisciplinary transitional environment, that is utilized by a peer group of Dancers soon after their graduation. OSD groups provides a comprehensive, networked, global platform, based on  three integral components: a Physical component, a Theoretical Component and a Technology Component, with all necessary Technology tools, including a Linux operating system, with Sound design, Motion Capture, Video Editing and Producing Tools, for each OSD participant so that they could realize their 21st-century, Global, and Multidisciplinary Dance Identity sooner than later. This hopefully levels the playing field for all young Dancers, if you will, in negotiating the realities of the professional Dance world.  

The APTAR Process [A=Art, P=Process, T=Tools, A=Application, R=Reset] provides a process for Choreographers to maintain the movement core of their projects during collaborations with Sound, Visual Artists, and Technologists as they negotiate the pop-culture trends in Multidisciplinary Art in the Mid-2000’s and the associated use of Human Movement/Dancers in other art forms as merely ‘triggers’.  It helps maintain choregraphic integrity, while eliminating unnecessary ‘gimmickry’.  For example, in Dance contexts, a Piano Concerto has the same value as a Computer generated Algorithmic Composition, or in live settings, a Percussion improvisation has the same value as Live Coding. It is what inspires the Dancer/Choreographer that governs the relationship. 

 I use the APTAR process on my own work, for example,  while designing the Sound and Technology environment for Choreographer Vanessa Voskuil’s “Shift”  in 2012. Given my viewpoints that  1. The use of Technology tools in Dance is not a novelty in the 21st century, and 2. Since this was a Dance performance, and an experiential one for both the Movers and the Audience in extending their Kinesthetic selves aided by the Technology Environment of SHIFT,  my use of the Software Isadora, (Image 6), Kinect cameras, Pure Data, OSC, LAN’s, DAW’s, computers, VM’s, Amplifiers, Crossovers and Sound Generation Surfaces etc. in achieving that goal were not a part of the public conversations with the Audience or the Movers, either before, during or after the performance.  SHIFT was not about the Technology—those were just my tools in realizing Vanessa’s vision.  A Pianist isn’t asked for a breakdown of a Bosendorfer Piano and its Acoustic properties, likewise there was no need for a breakdown of mine.  Hence without the distractions of Technology, SHIFT provided the Participants an experience of what our augmented future selves may experience, integrating and interacting with our environment, both through analog and digital means, all as a natural,  seamless process.   Besides two discreetly placed Kinect cameras that captured RGB and Infrared information that were sent to the computers behind the scenes, there were no visible signs of the Technology or myself during the production.  A few weeks after the production the Movers were given the opportunity to ask about the Technology and some did.  This could be Dance of the future…. Hence the APTAR process can be useful, to negotiate the “Glitz, Glam, Shock and Awe” of Technology, unless if that’s what you are aiming for.

KK: What specifically drew you into questioning how the moving body and technology interacted? 

MG: In hindsight, with everything that I had become aware of over the years during my work, including the reasons for this innate desire i had, to work in the field of Music and Modern, Post Modern &  Experimental Dance as an Interdisciplinary Artist, a Collaborative Art form, where those of my kind, South Asian Immigrant Musician’s, had never worked in before,  it became clear to me that my very early exposure to Dance, during my formative years, from the ages  3-8, played a profound role in my work in Dance, Dance & Music and Dance & Technology later. 

Briefly, I was born and raised in the mountains of Sri Lanka where the only Dance I was exposed to then were Hindu Religious festivals and associated Rituals of Dance, Music, Song, Trance, Body Piercings, Body Suspensions (Image 7),  Fire Walking, etc. These memories remain vivid only because they were undiluted by other images of Dance as this was 1960’s Sri Lanka. Television service was a good 10 to 15 years away, and trips to the Movie Theaters were extremely rare.  The awareness of any Western Dance was non-existent until l got to my early teens, and we were years before the Internet. Hence these rituals left me with a sense of awe and the impression of this Human desire to be elsewhere....somewhere beyond…beyond our realities.... to find greater meaning to our existence, and by whatever means necessary, and that Dance and its community of Dancers, Musicians, Singers and Guru’s with additional tools of Fire, Metal Hooks, Suspension, Trance etc. were where all the answers could possibly  be found.  I didn’t of course understand why I felt that way then, it was just a feeling, I was young. And it definitely didn't seem I was going to find the answers to any of it, when I soon began my Music education in Royal College of Music, Piano, when I was about 10.  It was a contrast in forms, structure and philosophy.  However this underlying desire to go beyond ourselves through a community of individuals, never left my thinking. Besides Music, I also liked Sports and the rigorous mental and physical discipline that came with it, the rhythm of it and the aesthetic qualities of it (all aspects reflected in Dance), and, I liked building things—Electrical, Electro Mechanical etc.—which led to my lifelong interest in Technology and associated work.  

However, all these aspects in my life didn’t meet anywhere during my teenage years as they all had independent paths. This changed  about a year after I arrived in the US from Sri Lanka as a college student, when I went to a Merce Cunningham Concert in 1984.  Besides my exposure to Modern Dance on that day, I was also exposed to the realms of ‘New Music”,  the work of John Cage and my ensuing immersion in Modern Dance, its philosophies, New Music,  its philosophies, including a critical aspect that connected most of them in their search for a greater understanding through eastern philosophies,  and associated directions where I was now able to combine all my above interests in my work and thinkings as a Dance Musician.

In the early 1990’s, becoming familiar with Australian Performance Artist Stelarc’s work further helped bridge the gaps in my understanding on how Movement, Technology and Sound could/should interact and evolve in Dance.  From his Body Suspension experiments (Image 8) to the Robotic appendages infused into his body, his explorations of further extensions of the human body, the seeking of the higher self, etc. made that connection from my childhood, of Rituals, Trance, Body Suspensions and metal hooks to now Robotics, Technology and embedded sensors and 21st century modes of seeking the higher self.  However, as much as I relished the idea of sourcing parts and building electro-mechanical extensions, as a Dance purist I found Stelatc’s Robotics experiments, like the Third Hand (Image 9) with wired interfaces, interfered greatly with the lines of the Dance Body. Keep in mind that by then Piloboulous was showing us the possibilities of the physical capabilities of the Dance body, without any Technological augmentation.  So Stelarc’s Robotic augmentations seemed cumbersome, not for Stelarc’s goals by any means or his explorations,  but in Dance contexts it would also draw unnecessary attention to the Technology.  This remained a nagging concern and made me to look for other solutions to add to my tools and work hence Mark’s (Coniglio) Motion Capture software ISADORA, became the choice.

KK: And how do you see that symbiotic relationship the body and technology reflective of the symbiotic relationship between music and dance?

MG: As you know, the most public aspect of Dance is a Dance Performance.  Attending a Dance Performance exposed Artists from other mediums, like Music/Sound, Visual Arts, Writers, Poets and now Technologists to Dance’s multidisciplinary identity and the possibilities of collaborating with Dance if interested. So choreography, being the creative outlet of Dance, allows for this situational relationship of collaboration, a process that is confined to a certain time frame, one where the Choreographer identifies the Music/Musician, who composes a score for a specific piece of Choreography by said Choreographer.  This then allows for the coming together of “disparate” art forms of Music and Dance, culminating in a Performance with now an Audience present.  Western Society allows for this and it is built into the structure of Dance economics and funding.  However in order to make the correlation to the symbiotic relationship of Dance and Technology to that of the Dance and Music relationship, we need to first look at the relationship of Music and Dance in depth. 

There are fundamentally two perspectives. From a Dance perspective, Dance and Music collaborations are quite common, having peaked in the 1980’s and 1990’s and now ubiquitous.  However, from a Music Perspective (excluding us Dance Musicians), this relationship is still quite rare and relatively unexplored, complicated, and even in some Music circles, considered as the final great challenge in New Directions in Music.  However, if you continue to dig deeper, you will notice that the Musicians who went beyond the situational relationship of collaborations, where besides interacting with Choreography, they began interacting with Movement Vocabulary—the language of Dance—were provided a much greater comprehension of Dance, and in turn they were able to make critical contributions to the development of Dance as a whole. This included extending themselves beyond what conventional identities and roles Music could have provided them, and 20th century Dance history has many examples of this. 

 Dance Musicians Louis Horst (Graham), John Cage (Cunningham), Pia Gilbert (Dance Academia), Robert Ellis Dunn (Judson Choreographers), Katherine Teck (Dance Music Scholarship),  Mark Coniglio (Isadora), and many of my colleagues like John Toenjes (LAIT), Andy Warshaw (LEMPS), etc. all connected with Dance at the Movement Vocabulary level and in turn were able to contribute to the development of Dance, while extending themselves in their capabilities.  Mark Coniglio will tell you that he wouldn't have developed Isadora if not for Dance, not unlike John Cage’s development of the Prepared Piano.  Both are significant developments that came directly out of engagement with Dance. Hence I refer to the two distinct types of Dance & Music relationship as 1. Micro Cycles of Limited Affect/Effect through Choreography,  which are the conventional collaborations with Dance that any Musician can undertake and quite ubiquitous now and 2. The Macro Cycles of Complex Affect/Effect through Movement Vocabulary (Image 10),  the relationship that defines Dance Musicians, where the symbiosis of Dance and Music occurs. In the past few years, towards the end of my research, It became evident to me, that Dance Musicians play the same role as the Musicians I saw during  those rituals in my childhood.  Both connected with Dance at the Movement Vocabulary level, a symbiotic relationship that continues to exists, even when there is no Audience present.

Steve Paxton made this observation- “Behind Movement Research (The Org.) there was Judson. Behind Judson was Robert Ellis Dunn”. This observation pretty much sums up the Symbiotic relationship that Dance Musicians can, and have had, with Dance.

Dance and Technology follows the same path, with similar dual perspectives, where Dance has enough of an established history with Technology that its applications are not considered a novelty any more by many of us.  However, the rise of pop-culture trends in Multidisciplinary Art in the mid 2000’s, and the increased interests from Visual Arts, Mainstream and Computer Music, Technology, and even Engineering fields in incorporating Human Movement into their art and projects by utilizing Dancers, we can see collaborations where often the emphasis is on the Technology as a novel element.  Becoming aware of this aspect of Dance history empowers Dancers to work with Technology not only through collaborations, but through a seamless symbiotic existence with it.

KK: Can you talk more about what you think the next steps will be in the development of "Dance Technology"/ multidisciplinary dance as a form? And what should be some of the priorities of artists working in this arena?

MG: The comprehensive 20th Century developments in Dance have given us the theoretical foundations necessary and the associated work undertaken, the Technology tools and associated applications identified, and are pointing us towards a 21st century Embodied Multidisciplinary Dance Identity where now Technology applications can be applied in the daily practice of all aspects of Dance. From Dance Kinesiology, to Dance Notation, to Dance Technique, to Dance Composition, to Dance Improvisation, Movement Analysis, Feedback Tools and Collaboration tools, and all through Permanent, Embedded Augmented interfaces for daily External and Internal input/output of the Dancer’s Environment, these can now be used by Dancers in a cohesive multidisciplinary embodied identity of Dance where you explore all aspects of this multidisciplinary Identity, at all levels. We are not fully there yet, be we are on the threshold of it……

There is that interesting historical detail about how the pointe shoe evolved. Here not because someone decided to build pointe shoes and then see what Ballet Dancers can do with them,  but more so because Ballet Dancers had begun to rise on their toes while dancing leading to the need, the development and evolution of the shoes.

As an example, similar to the use of a Unitard/Leotard/Dance clothing, if you used Mark’s (Coniglio) ISADORA or John’s (Toenjes) LAIT daily— which both came out of need in Dance—  you will experience an increased information flow coming your way daily from these tools, which will directly contributing to and enhance your creative process.  The need to extend the capabilities of your instrument, the Kinesthetic Body, utilizing the tools and technologies at hand in your daily practice, towards a greater realization of your abilities, yourself, yourself in your art and your art as a whole is here.  Artists should work towards making it happen in their practice.

Dancers: know your Dance History. This is critical, especially focusing on 20th century developments. You don’t need to know all of it, just critical moments, the end results and ensuing directions. Make connections. I am quite aware that Dance Historians can be specialized and focused on certain elements of Dance and not all of it, and Dance Technology Historians/Theorists, and Dance Music Historians/Theorists are rare, if any, yet, but hopefully I have laid out a skeleton timeline and specific events on the developments in Sound and Technology in Dance contexts and the People involved and the directions that have occurred, and you have your resources, like Mark, John and many others like us who will always be there.

Finally, my advice is to remain true to your creative inspirations and goals for a given moment.  A Painter may have many colors of Paint on his/her palette, but may choose to use only one or two colors for a specific work, just what's necessary for that specific creative inspiration.  Some of Picasso’s works are a great example of that.  As a Dancer, your Palette, now 20 years into the 21st century, includes Sound and Technology Tools, here not only for utilization during Collaborations and Performances, but during your daily practice as a Dancer, in your thinkings, in exploring your Instrument, anywhere in your creative process even long before you get to the Stage to share something with the Public.  Use them, or use a few of them, or none at all, but know that you have them at your disposal. Expand your creative imagination with that awareness of the tools that you have at your disposal.  Always keep in mind that Dance, by the very nature of 20th century developments, provides an Extensive Multidisciplinary, Experimental Environment unlike any other art form for your use. It's your playground. Yours, Use it.  

There will be obstacles, but don’t be discouraged, never be discouraged.  Grand Union began a performance with about 200 people in the audience and ended it with about 20 and went on to have an impact on Dance.



Resources: 

1. Linux ‘Studio’:  A Computer Operating system- It is free and has many Sound Design, Motion Capture, Video and other tools.   Install it on a Computer, even an old one that is about 4-5 years old.  Explore. 


2. “The Creators”- Book, by Daniel Boorstin. A history about the leaders of Imagination... find your place at the end of it.


3. “Chance and Circumstance”- Book by Carolyn Brown. Dancer, Cunningham Company, on 20 years with Cage and Cunningham.- A Dancers viewpoint  of her personal and professional relationship with two great figures of Dance.


4. “The Ambient Century: From Mahler to Moby”- Book, on significant Musicians of  the 20th century. 


5. “Physical Computing: Sensing and Controlling the Physical World with Computers”- an old book, but a good one

6. “The Age of Spiritual Machines”- Book, by Ray Kurtzweil- Futurist, written in 1999, foretells where we are today….


7. “The Power of Myth”- Book, by Joseph Campbell.- I have returned to this Book many times over the years and will continue to do so. 


8. Black Mountain College- Google-  Know this- Significant moment in Dance History.


9. “9 Evenings of Theater and Engineering”- Google- Know this.- Landmark event.


10. “Bell Labs”- Google- Besides their work during 9 Evenings and many other contributions to society, they also created the Unix Operating System. Which is what OSX, iOS, Linux and many other operating systems are built on today.   Connections….find, make and be empowered.