Skip to main navigation menu Skip to main content Skip to site footer

Thematic focus on Time-Life and Creation

Vol. 3 No. 2 (2025): Revista Estud(i)os de Dança 6

What a PITY! You used to be so beautiful: Of a possible ballet for life and for the scene

DOI
https://doi.org/10.53072/RED202502/00204

Abstract

Pena [Pitiful Feathers] is one of the outcomes of a postdoctoral research project developed at the Human Kinetics Faculty, University of Lisbon, under the supervision of Prof. Dr. Elisabete Monteiro. Entitled Possible Ballet, the study proposes improvisation practices based on the principles of movement and the structure of a ballet class, allowing each individual to approach the technique according to their own possibilities and interests, through the translation, adaptation, and reinvention of movements. This approach emerges from a long-standing engagement with ballet technique in a professional dance trajectory that includes training at the School of American Ballet and the Joffrey Ballet School, as well as professional experience with major companies such as the Berlin Opera Ballet and the Pennsylvannia Ballet—institutions that uphold an aesthetic of the able-bodied dance (Albright, 1997). Furthermore, the research also draws on disability studies, informed by the lived experience of a stroke, leading to a critical re-evaluation of values ​​and perspectives related to dance and participation in scenic projects involving mixed-ability casts. The deepening of Possible Ballet procedures, not only as a pedagogical approach but also as a creative device, contributes to the field of disability studies and expands the poetic potential of this proposal, which adopts practice-based research as its methodological approach. The creative process of the scenic proposal Pitiful Feathers—the focus selected for this text—puts into action the exercise of thinking the space as a space for propositions (Teixeira, 2011). It also responds to calls by various authors for aesthetic innovation in ballet and contributes to the confrontation of the symbolic and ideological meanings assigned to the disabled body in contemporary culture (Albright, 2001). Given its relationship with canonical works of the classical ballet repertoire, It aligns with what Midgelow (2007) refers to as reworking.

References

  1. Akinleye, A. (2021). Ballet, from property to art. In A. Akinleye (Ed.), (Re:) claiming ballet (pp. 10–28). Intellect Books.
  2. Albright, A. C. (1997). Choreographing difference: The body and identity in contemporary dance. Wesleyan University Press.
  3. Albright, A. C. (2001). Strategic abilities: Negotiating the disabled body in dance. In A. Dils & A. C. Albright (Eds.), Moving history/dance cultures: A dance history reader (pp. 56–70). Wesleyan University Press.
  4. Alencar, J. (2020). Drag cisne: Barbie & balé. In R. Ferreira & E. Santos (Eds.), Pesquisa em balé no Brasil – panoramas sobre história, ensino e cena (pp. 155–165). Editora IFG.
  5. Brown, D. (2014). Ballet, Why and How?: on the role of classical ballet in dance education. Arnhem:ArtEZ Press.
  6. Farrugia-Kriel, K., & Jensen, J. N. (Eds.). (2021). The Oxford handbook of contemporary ballet. Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780190871499.001.0001
  7. Gleich, J., & Faulkner, M. (2021). Ballet at the margins: Karole Armitage and Bronislava Nijinska. In K. Farrugia-Kriel & J. N. Jensen (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of contemporary ballet (pp. 62-80). Oxford University Press.
  8. Hermans, C. (2016). Differences in itself: Redefining disability through dance. Social Inclusion, 4(4), 160–167. https://doi.org/10.17645/si.v4i4.699
  9. Kuppers, P. (2003). Disability and contemporary performance: bodies on edge. Routledge.
  10. Midgelow, V. (2007). Reworking the ballet: Counter-narratives and alternative bodies. Routledge.
  11. Mendes, J. M. (2015). Aporias temporárias na investigação em artes. Escola Superior de Teatro e Cinema. http://hdl.handle.net/10400.21/4411
  12. Ritenburg, H. M. (2010). Frozen landscapes: A Foucauldian genealogy of the ideal ballet dancer’s body. Research in Dance Education, 11(1), 71–85. https://doi.org/10.1080/14647891003671775
  13. Rodrigues, G. E. F. (2003). O método BPI (bailarino-pesquisador-intérprete) e o desenvolvimento da imagem corporal: Reflexões que consideram o discurso de bailarinas que vivenciaram um processo criativo baseado neste método [Tese de doutoramento, Universidade Estadual de Campinas]. Repositório da UNICAMP. https://doi.org/10.47749/T/UNICAMP.2003.289138
  14. Rosa, P. S. da. (2022). Estética do (Im)Possível: A deficiência como potência na criação cênica [Dissertação de mestrado, Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Sul]. Lume Repositório Digital. http://hdl.handle.net/10183/246206
  15. Teixeira, C. (2011). Deficiência em cena. Editora Ideia.
  16. Zeller, J. (2021). ‘Can you feel it?’: Pioneering pedagogies that challenge ballet’s authoritarian traditions. In A. Akinleye (Ed.), (Re:) claiming ballet (pp. 172–188). Intellect Books.