Technical Requirements. All Papers must be:
12-point Times New Roman
1.25 inch margins or less, (not larger)
Minimum length—5 written pages, can be longer.
Source page listing all print and online sources including chapters, articles video etc. The source page is NOT included in the page count!
Pictures or other illustrations are welcomed. These are also not part of the page count.
1. Pick 1 or 2 live dance works that you have written about this semester. It should be obvious that at least 1 dance work be one that interests you the most. Sometimes 1 dance work will have lasted the entire concert. In other productions there are several dance works in one concert. You may choose to focus on 1 or 2 dance works from one concert. You may choose to focus on an evening length concert. Or you may choose to focus on 2 dance works from 2 separate concerts. (I recommend writing about no more than 2 dance works for this paper.) This is your primary focus. You may but are not required to pick 1 additional concert as a contrast to your primary focus.
The Introduction will provide basic information and establish your main idea or questions that you will explore in your paper-this is called a thesis.
The Description will answer questions, provide information, and discuss these questions and ideas. In this paper the evidence should be presented as part of the writing but it is not a description of everything. Your descriptive evidence should cover specific aspects, key moments in the choreography —movement sequences, activity, stage sets, audience reactions, etc.—that illustrate your key ideas about the choreography and performance. Do Not spend more than a paragraph retelling the storyline of the choreography. Only explain story parts that are necessary for the reader to understand you key ideas. More is not more. Focused descriptive evidence is more.
• For a specific choreographer—their biography, describe their style or how they create dance. What is the meaning, ideas or goals of their work? “Goal” is about intent. (This is answered by combining your earlier paper with interpretations and information drawn from programs, q & a’s, newspaper and blog reviews, choreographer websites and personal blogs, etc. How do they accomplish their goals? What is their process? You must provide descriptions. You should already have this evidence from earlier papers.
• For a dance style-both traditional and staged—find out its history and how it’s evolved. What is its style or unique elements?
• What is the choreographer/performance/traditions connection to other choreographers, dance styles, etc. Can you make a connection to another specific performance that you saw? This is supporting evidence for the point(s) you want to make about the style, performance, choreography, and historical connection of the concert you are writing about. How does the contrast help explain the main topic?
• What other large concept or historical dance style helps you understand or explain your topic? Describe that in relation to your main subject.
• What did you find out about the choreographer/performance/tradition that is special or helped your appreciation and understanding.
• How do different approaches to choreography change meaning, perception, comprehension? Do you think one is a better approach or makes a stronger artistic statement or interpretation of a dance tradition?
• What do you think the choreographer accomplished? Why or why not was the choreographer’s goal accomplished?
Together the Summary and Conclusion should be a restatement and defense of your main idea and final ideas about it in 1-2 paragraphs. You are discussing what was “accomplished.” “Accomplishment,” in this case, is your opinion about the performance success. For example: If you feel another meaning was present that the choreographer may not have been aware of, explain what and how this makes you view the performance. What other conclusions did you come to? Do you still have questions? All points should connect back to your earlier evidence. If you cannot connect to something you’ve already said it means you are missing something in the body of your paper.