Considering Bullough's theory of psychical distancing and notions of Essay

Considering Bullough's theory of psychical distancing and notions of kinaesthetic empathy (Stolnitz etc.), discuss the extent - Essay Example Two scholars in particular dominated this debate in the early to mid-twentieth century and this paper explores each of their theories in turn: first Bullough’s theory of psychical distance and secondly Stolnitz’s theory of kinaesthetic empathy . The language of these two authors is quite technical and so definition and clarification of the terms they use in each case is necessary before the theories can be understood in depth. In the light of these two approaches and some more recent critiques of them, there is then a consideration of the extent to which the choreographer can attempt to shape or control the viewer’s degree of attention, and in particular whether or not it is possible to create the conditions within an audience for different levels of attention. A key element in the work of Stolnitz is the idea that when we look at things in the world we always do so with a certain attitude, by which he means that we devote more attention to some things and less t o others and that this varies from person to person and from one occasion to another. He uses the example of an Indian scout giving close attention to markings (Stolnitz, 1960, p. 17) as someone at the more focused end of this spectrum whereas someone just out for a stroll would be at a the less focused end. This state of giving something close attention involves excluding other things which might be a distraction and preparing to react to what is seen, either in a positive or negative way. The relevance of this to dance is that when an audience comes to watch dance being performed they come with a special kind of attitude, involving focus and hopefully a positive expectation of perceiving something worthwhile that they will react to in some way. This kind of expectant appreciation is, in Stolnitz’s terms the aesthetic attitude, deriving from ancient Greek philosophy where aesthetics is the appreciation of beauty. A further important distinction, in Stolnitz’s view, of this special attitude and way of perceiving things is that it is quite different from everyday kinds of perception, because it is not put to some practical purpose: â€Å"Usually perception is merely a rapid and momentary identification of the kind of thing it is and its uses.† (Stolnitz, 1960, p. 18) In contrast to this Stolnitz defines the aesthetic attitude as â€Å"disinterested and sympathetic attention to and contemplation of any object of awareness whatever, for its own sake alone.† (Stolnitz, 1960, p. 19). In ordinary modern English we might assume that â€Å"disinterested† means â€Å"bored† or â€Å"not much interested in† but in fact it has a narrower meaning of not wanting any specific purpose out of the act of paying attention something. In terms of dance, then, this aesthetic attitude is what comes into play when a member of the audience comes simply to observe and enjoy the performance. He or she may at times reflect on what is seen , or react with pleasure, or distaste, or even anger at what happens in the performance, but the point is that coming to see the dance is the only outcome that the observer is really after. The example of a lecturer coming to watch a student performance would not, in Stolnitz’s view, be an example of someone approaching the dance with the appropriate aesthetic