資料來源: Google Book
Modern dance in a postmodern world :an analysis of federal arts funding and its impact on the field of modern dance
- 作者: Van Dyke, Jan.
- 出版: Reston, VA : National Dance Association c1992.
- 稽核項: xiv, 169 p. :ill. ;23 cm.
- 標題: Modern dance , Modern dance United States -- History. , Modern dance United States. , History.
- ISBN: 0883145251 , 9780883145258
- 附註: Includes bibliographical references (p. 163-169).
- 系統號: 005156978
- 資料類型: 圖書
- 讀者標籤: 需登入
- 引用網址: 複製連結
This book om the interrelationship of economics and aesthetics from the perspective of modern dance includes a preface and six chapters. Chapter 1, "The Modern Dance Point of View," presents a history of modern dance from 1915 to the 1980s. Chapter 2, "The National Endowment for the Arts and Its Impact on Modern Dance," consists of a review of literature and a discussion of the impact of the NEA on dance companies' organizational structure and financial stability, the decentralization of the field, the impact of NEA funding patterns on other funding agencies, the nature of the grant-making process, and political implications of NEA funding policies. Chapter 3 presents perspectives from four artists (Elizabeth Keen, Kathryn Posin, Jefferson James, and Spider Kedelsky). Chapter 4,"Higher Education and the Professional Dance World," discusses modern dance and the university, professionalism, the education and training of dancers, the conservatory tradition, ballet training, testing and technique, and the dancer as a person. Chapter 5, "Modern Dance in a Postmodern World," discusses issues related to modern dance as an art in the contemporary postmodern period, the NEA's impact and role in transforming dance into a commodity, careerism among dancers, a loss of purpose among dancers, and the role of education. Chapter 6, "Afterward: April 10, 1991," concludes the work with a discussion of the economic recession and funding for the arts, press coverage, and NEA's present situation. (Contains 128 references.) (LL)
來源: Google Book
來源: Google Book
評分