Dance Images in Temples of Mainland Southeast Asia ... - Repository

Smith has pointed out (1999, 119 –126) that there are in principle three different approaches
when one considers the nature of a dance image. He calls the fi rst one (a) “the slice”, the second
(b) “the composite”, and the third (c) “the fantasy”.
(a) “The slice” approach assumes, according to Smith, that a dance image is a kind of a slice
of reality that is an actual portrayal of a particular dance, just like a snapshot photograph at
least in principle could be. This approach is actually possible only when dealing with rather
recent photographic material from the periods of fl ashlights and high-speed fi lms or digital
technology.
(b) “The composite” approach, on the other hand, understands that a dance image is a
kind of synthesis of the moments and various elements from which the artist fi rst selects and
then constructs his or her vision of dance. The elements of this kind of dance image may thus
have been collected from several sources and rearranged to create an impression of dance or a
particular performance. This approach is inevitable, for example, when the artist or craftsman
is working with time-consuming media such as stone, murals etc. and the creator is not able, for
example, to make quick sketches (or, in our times, to take a snapshot) of a live performance.
(c) “The fantasy” approach fi nally admits that a certain dance image is not based on
observation of a particular dance performance and is thus more or less completely a result of
its creator’s imagination. It may, however, include elements of dance or dances with which the
artist is, in one way or another, already familiar.
Once one has decided which one of these approaches is appropriate in connection with a
certain dance image, further questions arise, according to Smith. If the image belongs to the
(a) “slice” type, these questions may be for example, “Why has the artist a particular scene to
render at a certain time from a certain point-of-view?” In the case of the (b) “composite” type
the questions could be “Why has the artist chosen particular elements from various locations,
moments, or points-of-views, and is there any ways to discern what those locations, moments,
or points-of-views were or are?” Whereas the questions in connection with a dance image
belonging to the (c) “fantasy” type may be thus: “Why has the artist chosen to put together
pictorial elements in such a fashion, and are they based in any way on actual observation?”
Finally, in the above-mentioned study Smith formulates an adaptation of Panofsky’s
iconographical interpretation technique suitable for the use of dance research. According to
him, Panofsky’s three successive steps of the analysis could, in the context of dance images, be
formulated as follows:
1. To become familiar with all the images of dance from the period in question.
2. To discover all the sources of information related to dance of the period.
3. To be aware of representative pictures of the artist, school, or genre to which the
example being studied belongs.
Although one of the early formulators of the above technique of dance iconography, Tilman
Seebass, is an ethnomusicologist and has drawn examples from non-European cultures, the
majority of its exponents are working in the fi eld of western arts. How is this method, which
has its roots in Panofsky’s studies of European Renaissance art, applicable to a very different
cultural context and what extra considerations are required while adapting it into the research
27