From: smoliar@argon.iss.nus.sg (Stephen Smoliar)
Subject: Re: Dance Notatation (LONG)
Reply-To: smoliar@iss.nus.sg (Stephen Smoliar)
Organization: Institute of Systems Science, NUS, Singapore
Date: Fri, 25 Dec 1992 02:10:34 GMT

In article <1992Dec24.195807.27683@cgrg.ohio-state.edu> sutherland+@osu.edu
(Scott Sutherland) writes:
>Finally, a thread on this group that I can really sink my teeth into! :-)
>
Indeed, it is about time that something of such substance should show up on
rec.arts.dance!

>First, a word of introduction.  I am a software engineer working for the
>Department of Dance at the Ohio State University.  My background is in 
>Computer Science, but after 5 years working in dance I consider myself
>more of a dance person who happens to also be a programmer.
>
>My main job over the years has been to work with our Dance Notation Bureau
>Extension for Education and Research and the Dance Notation Bureau in NYC 
>to develop a Mac-based Labanotation editor called "LabanWriter" (more about
>that some other time).
>
Nevertheless, I should probably respond by introducing myself as the man who
planted the seed which ultimately blossomed into that project.  It has come
a long way from that Master's thesis which tried to etch out Labanotation
graphics on a Tektronix screen back in 1976!  I knew progress would have
to wait for bitmap graphics on a personal computer, and it is nice to see
that progress finally occur!
>
>** From: nagle@netcom.com (John Nagle) **
>
>>       Labanotation can probably notate martial arts moves, although
>> it's not well-suited for recording detailed hand actions.  (You could
>> probably notate a wrist grip, but not tying a shoelace).  Contact the
>> Dance Notation Bureau in New York City.  Books are available.
>
>It is actually quite good at detailed hand actions.  How detailed do you
>want to get?  LabanWriter has symbols already built in to deal with either
>specific fingers (or particular surfaces of a finger), and even specific
>joints of a particular finger.  We have a grad student here now working 
>on notating Indian Classical Dance.  Try doing that without being able to
>record detailed hand action.
>
>One of the great things about Labanotation is that is a fairly open
>system.  It already has *many* capabilities built in, but it is also 
>being expanded all the time by people with different needs.  We even have 
>a score here that was a collaborative effort between a notator and a 
>zoologist.  It records the mating movements of a jumping spider.  The 
>staff is a bit wider to accommodate 8 legs, but other than that, the 
>score is quite straightforward.
>
In all fairness, however, you have evaded John's hardest question (which is
actually Minsky's question, too).  Minsky has often wondered at why we have
been so successful to get a robot to play such good chess while we still cannot
get it to tie a child's shoelaces.  I have not seen an Labanotation for this,
so let me try to put down some thoughts one why one might be skeptical.

First of all, let us try to abstract what Labanotation does well.  Basically,
Labanotation is good at recording the movement of any hierarchically-structured
system of linkages, allowing for any number of degrees of freedom in the
linkage joints.  This is it can handle that jumping spider as well as it
can handle a jumping Barishnikov.  Even the question of whether your skeleton
is interior or exterior is not an issue.  Secondly, Labanotation is good at
sorting out those movements concerned with moving you from one place to another
with those which are performed within your frame of reference.  I do not know
how much of this was a product of Laban's intuition, but he showed real insight
in making that cut so early in is basic structure of the notation.  Another
asset of Labanotation is that it is as hierarchical as its underlying skeletal
model.  This means that one can notate at varying levels of precision,
depending on the demands of the notation task.

It should be obvious that my reason for lining up the assets is that I REALLY
want to talk about the liabilities!  Labanotation works best when dealing with
an individual.  Unless the notation has improved markedly since I worked with
it fifteen years ago, the problems of INTERACTING with both objects and other
agents are still legion.  This is not to say that the notation cannot handle
such interactions but that it handles them with far more AD HOC constructs than
it applies to individual movements.  I know about the jumping spider only
through hearsay.  It is a "Labanotation success story" which was around even
before I got into the game, myself.  My guess, however, is that the success
lies in the fact that the interactions are pretty simple;  and my guess is
that it requires a "floor plan" for the female's back, after which there is
really only one other interaction to take into account.  (For those who lack
subtlety, Burgess called it "the in-and-out thing" in A CLOCKWORK ORANGE.)

I would argue that tying shoelaces involves far more sophisticated interaction
than our mating spiders.  Have you ever seen a good text description of how to
tie shoelaces (or a necktie, for that matter)?  I am not even sure how I would
begin!  I know I learned by BEING SHOWN (which is still how most dance is
taught).  Even if I had access to a robot with a pair of hands like my own
(such as the Waseda WABOT), I really have no idea how I could program it to
allow me to show it how to tie shoelaces (let alone program it for the task
WITHOUT instruction).

At this point, the martial arts folks have to make the judgment call.  Having
never engaged in the sport, I do not know how important interaction is.  My
guess is that it is pretty important for many of the more interesting moves.
I would not be at all surprised if current Labanotation constructs are too AD
HOC to be REALLY useful for those moves.  However, I am just not in a good
position to judge.  I can only point out what you need to look for.
>
>>      There's a Mac program for writing Labanotation, developed at
>> the DNB extension at Ohio State.
>
>Thanks for the plug :-).  It is not only available but it is freeware.
>Write me for details.
>
Why not post them?  Why should there be a penalty for being shy?  What we need
is a larger base of people who will not feel intimated when confronted with the
symbols of the notation!

>>      But actually, dance notation isn't used much.  Few dancers know it,
>> and choreographers don't compose in it.  It's used to make a historical
>> record of major dance works for later revival, and not much else.
>
>Partially true.  It does not get used as much as it should.  It was never 
>intended as a choreographer's tool, but it could be very helpful to a 
>choreographer.  Every year, the percentage of literate dancers grows.  
>Many universities are now requiring their students to study some form of 
>notation, and in some states students as young as 5 or 6 are learning a 
>specialized form of Labanotation  called "Motif" as they learn to dance.
>What a concept!  The kids take to Motif as easily as they learn basic music
>notation.  It's a lot harder to have to learn a notation system after you
>have been dancing for years.
>
Unless I am mistaken, either Laban or one of his immediate disciples first
introduced Motif Writing for the beginning dance curriculum in the United
Kingdom.  I do not know if it ever really became successful.  (I am not sure
the Royal Ballet has ever used Labanotation.  They used to have a heavy
commitment to the Benesh system, which is a pretty poor substitute.)  However,
the underlying principle is important:  Most children learn notation when they
first learn to make music.  One does not NEED the notation to make music, but
learning it AFTER one acquires performing skills is far more difficult than
learning it WHILE one acquires those skills.  (The obvious question is the
extent to which the notation influences HOW those skills--musical or dance--are
actually learned.  Unfortunately, there is so little systematic study of ANY
form of artistic pedagogy that this is likely to be an open question for some
time.)
>
>Bye the way, Labanotated works also are quite decipherable months (or
>years) later.  A couple of years ago, I was in Hong Kong speaking at a 
>conference and I had the pleasure of seeing Doris Humphrey's "With My Red 
>Fires," which had been reconstructed from the score that was written 
>*twenty years* earlier.  It was really great.  Since I was sitting with 
>the person who had notated it all those years before, it was nice to hear
>from her that it was danced very much as it had been then.
>
This deserves a bit of comment.  Most important is the question of who did the
reconstruction?  How much did that person know about with the Humphrey style or
the habits of the notator?  It is important to recognize that one really cannot
go directly from notation to dance, as one might through a computer-driven
animation system.  As is the case with music, there are always subtle questions
of interpretation.  It's just that those subtleties can have more impact in
movement than they generally do in music (although there is the old joke that
Bernstein could not conduct a piece of music until he had heard someone else
perform it, since he needed such a performance for a "mental model" of "how
it went").
-- 
Stephen W. Smoliar; Institute of Systems Science
National University of Singapore; Heng Mui Keng Terrace
Kent Ridge, SINGAPORE 0511
Internet:  smoliar@iss.nus.sg