Corporeality, Corporality, Corporeity, and Embodiment in Performing Arts
Corporealidade, Corporalidade, Corporeidade e Corporalização em Artes Performativas
Vagner de Souza Vargas [1]
Universidade Nova de Lisboa, Lisboa, Portugal
Abstract
The concepts of corporeality, corporality, corporeity, and embodiment can be misunderstood and overlapped in the researches of the performing arts area, when their differences, specificities as well as encounter points are not clear to whoever decides to develop investigations addressing these matters. This approach can foster a plural research field in the matters related to the performing arts in general, also centring the reflexions from the perspective of the subjects who are feeling, experiencing, and surrendered to the creative processes. By addressing corporeity, corporeality, corporality, and embodiment as reflexive viewpoints, performing artists can potentialize singular findings, dynamized from experiences aroused from the body-voice. Within this regard, body and vocal work can assume other ways as research interests. The aspects related to the subjectivity not being disconnected from the body-voice as a potentializer for the experiences opens up the opportunity to understand how the vocal-bodily experiences lived during the creative process can generate singular learning/knowledge/understanding processes, characteristically potentialized by the performing artists who drive their works in this way.
Keywords: Corporeality; Corporality; Corporeity; Embodiment; Performing Arts.
Resumo
Os conceitos de corporealidade, corporalidade, corporeidade e corporificação podem ser mal compreendidos e sobrepostos nas pesquisas da área das artes cênicas, quando suas diferenças, especificidades e pontos de encontro não ficam claros para quem decide desenvolver investigações que tratem desses assuntos. Essa abordagem pode fomentar um campo de pesquisa plural nas questões relacionadas às artes performativas em geral, centralizando também as reflexões a partir da perspectiva dos sujeitos que estão sentindo, vivenciando e se entregando aos processos criativos. Ao abordar a corporealidade, a corporeidade, a corporalidade e a corporificação como pontos de vista reflexivos, os artistas cênicos podem potencializar descobertas singulares, dinamizadas a partir de experiências despertadas pelo corpo-voz. Nesse sentido, o trabalho corporal e vocal pode assumir outros caminhos como interesse de pesquisa. Os aspectos relacionados à subjetividade não desvinculada do corpo-voz como potencializador das experiências abrem a oportunidade de compreender como as vivências vocais-corporais experimentadas durante o processo criativo podem gerar processos singulares de aprendizagem/conhecimento/compreensão, caracteristicamente potencializados pelos artistas performáticos que conduzem seus trabalhos dessa forma.
Palavras-chave: Corporealidade; Corporalidade; Corporeidade; Corporalização; Artes Performativas.
Introduction
Reflecting on the concepts regarding the acting technical work of professionals[i] from the performing arts, during their creative processes, often raises clashes and tensions in zones considered determined by some and dominated by others. However, one way to approach this subject, is through the observation and establishment of appropriate terminologies that will be addressed when researching in these knowledge fields. It is mentioned because they are intrinsically related to the concepts and their fields of discussion, as well as in-depth understandings.
In this sense, in order to highlight which terminology is more adequate to the specification of a possible conceptual and practical discussion, it will be brought to the text of this article, a proposal of a type of acting's technical work, developed by Vargas (2018), as an example motto. This will be assumed as a possible comparative because it is focused on an academic-artistic study in which the research field was about the creative process and how it can be broadly thought to other knowledge areas. This aspect will be used to discuss in this text the differences between the terms corporeity, embodiment, corporality, and corporeality, as well as the indication of possible theoretical frameworks related to them. The discussion of these terminologies in parallel with the referred example, departs from the reflections made by this author, situating them in the field of the performing artists’ creative processes and their reverberations at the sensitive sharing moments and aesthetic reception, but the latter two will not be the discussion focus on this article.
The relevance of this discussion is also given by the perception that the terminological specificity adopted by the researchers in the performing arts leads them to conceptual frameworks important to the outcomes of their investigations. By addressing their practices and terminological/conceptual adequacies to the proposal they are developing, they collaborate to the potentialization of the possible reverberations from that. When we also think about the proposition of reflexive writing as a way to address this type of study, the processes of investigation/research, whether academic, artistic or a hybrid mode in-between them, will have singularities and potentialities directly associated to the contextual parameters associated to their theoretical and practical references. This delimitation helps to focus on discussion parameters related to specific paths for each concept, and the ways that each terminology is most suitable to the proposals addressed in the researches in these areas. Moreover, this can also help other artists and scholars in understanding the directions that future researches may take on their subject of investigation and artistic practice, as well as their findings.
So, this article aims to explore the differences between the terms corporeity, corporeality, corporality, and embodiment, as mentioned, also in relation to the creative processes of performing arts professionals and the technical body-vocal work they engage in as part of their trainings/rehearsals in general. It will look at the ways in which these concepts are used to create meaningful and impactful performances and will consider the importance of the physicality of the body in performing arts in a broadly way during the theatrical event, as proposed by Vargas (2018). It is hoped that by exploring the differences between these terms, it will provide a better understanding for research pathways regarding the potentiality of the body as a foster to sensitive relationships which reverberate in a certain type of knowledge process, and the ways in which performers can use these aspects to create powerful and engaging performances, as well as other focus on research directions.
The creative process as a foster to broadly reflections
Vargas (2018) developed an academic-artistic research in which the creative process was considered as the field work, as it was also described by Vargas (2021a; 2021b). In this proposal, the experiences lived through body and vocal work were constantly thought as means to understand their impacts as emotions, feelings, sensations, experiences that could be caught, reproduced, re-dynamized, understood, enhanced in other training days during studio work, in something that was named by Vargas (2018; 2021b) as a theatrical-poetical experiment. What was perceived and felt during each working day, served as element to understand how the cognitive-affective-significative processes can be operationalized apart from what traditional cognitive sciences has proposed, stablishing another way for this. The use of words connected by hyphen, was also another proposal made by Vargas (2018), in which it is stated that this intends to highlight a hue, a hybridization in-between the aspects associated with the meaning or concept regarding to each word in order to create another meaning, putting together the differences as well as the singularities of each one of them because it is considered that, by doing this, other ways of understanding are possible. Not by enclosing the meanings/concepts to each word but the hyphen creates a connection made by movements, touches, experiences that frees us to reflect from another viewpoints. The hyphen is the touching for a free experience of reflexive movement.
The theatrical-poetical experiment developed by the author mentioned above, can be considered a certain type of a modus operandi in which the professionals from performing arts can dispose in order to generate working matrices, i.e., creative elements observed, felt, lived, experienced during their creative process in their training/studio works. One of the steps, starts from the creation of sensitive scores and sub-scores through body-vocal work, in something related - but not limited to - some of the proposals made by Barba & Savarese (1995), as well as Barba (2006; 2010). Some other dialogues about the procedure developed by Vargas (2018) can be inspired by elements proposed by Grotowski (1971; 1992), Artaud (1984; 2008), Oida (2001), Schechner (2006), amongst others.
The theatrical-poetical experiment can allow the performers to live/experience sensations which can or cannot be used during the creative moments. It is also important to point out that this creative process mentioned here is something done by performing arts professionals during daily works, not related to the theatrical event or some kind of sensitive sharing moments with the audience together. It can also be possible, but it wasn’t the main focus developed by Vargas (2018). The working elements emerged during this type of creative work on your self can provide subsidies from which actors can expand reflexions to other contexts and assumptions not necessarily related to the work proposed at the beginning of this experience. It can be said that it functions as a motto to broaden the possibilities of impacts and reflections that actors can propose, while they are aware about the potentialities that the experiences from their body-vocal work can open as argumentative elements from another viewpoint to discuss academic, artistic theories, and practices. As stated by Vargas (2018, p. 32), when we think about it in the academic-artistic context, we can consider that “it is a certain type of research field work in which the field is the actor’s body”. The experiences, sensations, emotions, feelings, and inspirations aroused from the body will be the essential part of the reflexions and discussions as fosters. However, from which aspect can we guide this when there’s a need to strengthen concepts associated to terminologies that can propose different argumentative routs?
Understanding terminologies in order to spread wings
It is really relevant to point out the aims that could guide the ways that academic-artistic research can assume. It’s just a matter of choice and there’s no one better than the other. The only thing that should be faced with precaution, is to be coherent with the concepts associated with the chosen terminology(ies) that will be assumed as the essential element/concept from where each reflexive step will be taken. It is said because each direction is legitim and the findings can also be if they are conceptually coherent with the research proposal. That’s why the creative process developed by Vargas (2018) was chosen as an example to highlight different possibilities that this work could have if the concept adopted to understand the experiences were corporeity, corporeality, corporality, or embodiment. Nonetheless, how can we understand these viewpoints differences? The way briefly proposed in this text, is through understanding the meanings of the terminologies mentioned above.
Regarding corporeity, it can be considered as a noun derived from the Latin words corpus and corporeus, meaning body. It refers to the physical substance of a person or a thing, or the physical presence and materiality of an entity, the quality of being or having a material body[ii]. Corporeity is a concept that focuses on the physicality of the body in performing arts. It is the recognition that the physical body is essential in performance and how this physicality is manifested in the work. This includes exploring the body’s physical capabilities, examining the potential of the body to create meaning, and communicating emotion. Through corporeity, performers are able to explore the potential of the body to create meaningful and impactful performances. Furthermore, corporeity can refer to the fundamental aspects of the body itself, including its physical and biological dimensions, associating this with the ways in which the actor's body-voice is trained and prepared for performance, such as through specific physical conditioning and exercises.
On the other hand, corporeality4 is a noun also derived from the Latin word corpus and another one: corporealis, also meaning body. It is used to describe the physical condition or presence of something, or the tangible nature of an entity. Corporeality is a concept that describes how the physicality of the body can be used to create meaning, emotion, atmosphere, and experience in performance. It focuses on the exploration of the body’s physical capabilities, exploring the potential of the body to communicate meaning, experience, and emotion. Through corporeality, performers are able to use the body to create powerful and emotive performances. The quality of meaning emerged by a corporeality viewpoint, derivates from the sensitive atmospheres-experiences operationalized from the body work dynamization, which can be considered in dialogue with some proposals made by many authors, such as: Phelan (1993), Bogart & Landau (2005), Foster (2010), Queiroz (2012), Lepecki (2016), and Vargas (2018).
Although Bielas & Abramciów (2009) sometimes mentioned the corporeality as a sort of synonym regarding aspects inherent to the human body, these authors also reflected about the existence of a certain relationship between the concepts of corporeality and experience. Bielas & Abramciów (2009) also traced discussions regarding an inner relationship among the way as corporeality operates itself being able to act as an agent influencing in the identity and alterity development processes. These authors summarized the concepts about how the human body operates relationships naming it as corporeality. In this case, the authors indicated a way to think about corporeality as an inner agent regarding the relationships processes but how it could be operationalized wasn’t their focus. However, when we expand this to the artistic field, it is important to add other concepts and reflections layers where corporeality, corporality, corporeity, and embodiment encompass different ways to approach assumptions that would reverberate in the possibilities to and from the performers’ creative processes. The context addressed through this article focuses on the artistic aims, and not into the development of the individual’s psychological character, identity, and alterity processes.
When we address corporality, it is considered as a noun referred to the material existence, having a material body[iii]. In an academic context, corporality in performing arts usually refers to the physicality and bodily expression of actors in their performances. It is the way in which actors use their bodies to convey emotions, feelings, experiences, and ideas to the audience. Moreover, in this context, the study of corporality in performing arts usually involves analysis of different techniques used by actors to express themselves physically on stage or where they are performing. This may include the study of movement and choreography, voice and speech, facial expression, and gesture. By understanding the principles of corporality in performing arts, performers can learn to create more dynamic and engaging performances that resonate with their audience. This may involve developing a deeper understanding of their own physicality and how they can use it to convey emotions, experiences, and ideas effectively on stage, contributing to overall their performances (Phelan, 1993; Bogart; Landau, 2005; Foster, 2010; Queiroz, 2012; Lepecki, 2016; Vargas, 2018).
On the other hand, embodiment is a noun derived from a Latin word related to "embody," meaning to give body or form to5. It is used to describe the act or process of embodying something, or the representation of an abstract idea or concept in concrete form. It also mentions that could be referred to as the expression of an idea, an action, providing (a spirit) with a bodily form. The Oxford English Dictionary defines embodiment as "the action of embodying or giving form to something; the state or fact of being embodied or expressed in a concrete form; the representation of an abstract idea or concept in a concrete form"[iv]. Embodiment is the idea of the performer embodying the character and their role through their physicality. It can also be considered to be about the performer’s ability to take on and inhabit a role, creating a three-dimensional character. Embodiment can be thought as an essential element in creating dynamic and believable performances, when the approach about a role or a character is one of the focuses encompassed, deeply associated with the performer’s body-voice abilities (Phelan, 1993; Lakoff; Jhonson, 1999; Bogart; Landau, 2005; Foster, 2010; Queiroz, 2012; Lepecki, 2016; Vargas, 2018; Souza, 2020).
Some studies that propose to intercross the areas of philosophy with the biological sciences and cognitive sciences, such as those proposed by Lakoff & Johnson (1999), discussed embodiment from a different perspective to that made in the performing arts, as discussed throughout this text. Although Lakoff & Johnson (1999) used the term embodiment, it was put as an element with diluted characteristics encompassing the concepts of corporeality, corporality, and corporeity, as discussed in this article. Even when addressed by other knowledge areas, sometimes it is not clear that some nuances that differentiate embodiment, corporeality, corporality, and corporeity can change the whole direction that a study may have, as well as its findings. Sullivan (2016) discussed that embodiment could represent different bodily perspectives. These discussions addressed embodiment just analysing it as a way to think about something regarding the body itself. However, when we transpose this perspective to the performing arts, we must consider the discussions dialoguing through layers that maybe were not the interest focus for the authors mentioned above. Nonetheless, their reflexions contributed to provide elements that help to propose bridges to analyse different possibilities from other pathways.
These four terminologies, associated with the characteristics mentioned above, can be added to the performing arts’ context by exploring how they can be used to address different nuances regarding discussions, reflections, as well as viewpoints for the sensitive sharing, at the same way as for the creative processes. By directing their researches from the perspective of corporeity, embodiment, corporality, and/or corporeality, performers can explore different potentials of the body to communicate/share/experience meanings, atmosphere-experiences, feelings, and emotions, creating a unique and powerful performances.
Corporeality, corporeity, corporality, and embodiment are interrelated concepts, frequently used interchangeably, but each one of them has a unique meaning and context within the field in performing arts, as mentioned above. They offer different perspectives on the body-voice and its role in performance, and each one of them can serve as a potentiator for the creative process in performing arts. By considering the differences among the concepts associated with each one of the mentioned terms, and how they impact on the creation and interpretation of a performance, we can gather a deeper understanding about the roles of the body-voice in performance and its relationship to the world around it. Despite their distinct meanings, the concepts of embodiment, corporality, corporeality, and corporeity are interrelated and can often overlap themselves. For example, the embodiment of a performer in performance can impact their corporeality, and their lived experience of the body (corporeity) can impact their embodied performance. Additionally, the way in which the audience perceives the performer's embodied performance can be influenced by their understanding of the performer's corporeality. Lakoff & Johnson (1999) discussed about aspects that can allow a considerable part of our thinking to have an inner relationship with the inconscient, associated with bodily inherent elements, which are interacting as a relationship from the sensorial-perceptive aspect and the environment. Although, Lakoff & Johnson (1999) didn’t explain the ways as the aforementioned relationships may occur, or even considering them regarding the performing artists’ creative processes, it is relevant transpose this discussion to observe that some scholars have addressed reflections around elements about bodily relationships that can generates another type of knowledge, but they haven’t found the ways to understand it. Souza (2020) points out that the explanation about this matter is not concise and stops into a dualistic overview that ends up to separate body and mind without to explain or to reflect about how the understandings about the significative processes can be processed away from the objective biologistic viewpoint. May the performing arts be the way for that?
Possibilities from a theatrical-poetical experiment
By thinking about the proposal made by Vargas (2018), if we consider it from the perspective of the corporeity’s concept, this work could be addressed thinking the theatrical-poetical experiment as a way to discover and improve body-vocal techniques that will potentialize the meanings of the performances. The focus would be associated with the impacts of the body-vocal techniques in the performer’s work. A limitation that I consider regarding this, may be suggested by the fact that it puts, in a certain way, the techniques in a hierarchical scale above the process of discovering other experiences beyond the techniques. On the other hand, it is also valid to consider such aspect, if this is the aim assumed as the process or the research itself.
If the choice for addressing the proposal made by Vargas (2018) was assuming embodiment as the main concept which leaded the process, the theatrical-poetical experiment would be focused on the creative process regarding the character. It could be considered like if the development of the reflections and work overview was made after the body-vocal development and improvement of techniques, and experiences. In this viewpoint, the proposal would be guided by applying the acquired knowledge of previous techniques in order to search physical elements that could contribute to embody the character, its characteristics, emotions, and future relations when in sensitive sharing moments, or even in theatrical events, as well. From this perspective, the techniques already dynamized and learned are the starting point from which a different nuance of the creative process will be developed, focused on the character and its contexts.
Nonetheless, if corporality was the concept chosen by Vargas (2018) to address his proposal, the theatrical-poetical experiment would be assumed as a way to enhance the creative possibilities in which the aims would be thought pointing about the results above the process, or even the process targeted to the findings. In other words, the theatrical-poetical experiment would work as a potentializer, a catalyst for the search of better ways to convey emotions, feelings, ideas, and experiences, sharing them in the future with the audience. The improvement/development of body-vocal techniques and the experiences that this process can provide to the performer won’t be the focus, as well as the perspective from corporality won’t be essentially focused on the creative process regarding a character. By addressing the corporality as the main concept for the theatrical-poetical experiment, as proposed by Vargas (2018), the research would be more interested in the relationship with the audience, and better ways to improve this aspect.
However, if the concept of corporeality was the one addressed as the aim to reflect about the theatrical-poetical experiment made by Vargas (2018), it would be thought in a way to use the working matrices, vocal, and bodily background in order to search for sensitive atmospheres-experiences. The synaesthetic experiences felt, dynamized, and worked during the creative process can provide elements to the actors develop new approaches that reverberate in another relationship with the audience, and also with themselves during the creative process. Nonetheless, the synaesthetic experiences dynamized during the creative process can also be a way to allow actors to reflect about how nontangible aspects, as for example, emotions, feelings, and atmospheres have an intense relationship with tangible ones, as the bodily and vocal matrices, techniques, movement, and abilities. In the in-between this, corporeality can broad other ways to reflect about not just on how the synaesthetic experiences are aroused and communed but to think in another way to understand a singular type of knowledge process. That was another aspect made by Vargas (2018), when this author, by experiencing the field work, identified the cognitive-affective-significative processes, i.e., another viewpoint apart from the traditional cognitive sciences but in which emotions, feelings, experiences, and physical aspects - when dynamized within an aware way - can show another possibility to understand these processes, not just focusing onto the neurological and cognitive aspects, but proposing the body-vocal aspects as instances that can produce another type of understanding, reflection, learning, and knowledge. By analysing from this viewpoint, corporeality can be a way to address aspects beyond the ones encompassed by the other concepts/terminologies discussed through this text.
Moving and reflecting
By understanding the ways as performing artists can propose discussions crossed by the body-vocal work during the creative processes, we are able to reflect about how they can lead us to foster a plural research field in the areas related to the performing arts in general. An essential part of it, comprehends that the focus comes from the artist’s body-vocal experiences when artistically aware of them, and assured about the ways previously chosen to drive a research field.
This type of viewpoint centres the reflexions from the perspective of the subjects who are feeling, experiencing, and surrendered to the creative processes. It’s not an obvious view, when we consider that the ways as many researches, findings, as well as pedagogies, and understandings are developed about the creative processes, and as the performing artists’ work itself occurs, were traditionally made by people who were not living the experiences from their own bodies and voices as the practitioners. It is also needed to point out that it’s not intended to depreciate the contributions made by directors, dramaturgs, scholars, and pedagogues who described, reflected about, as also proposed techniques, and approaches to actors develop their creative processes. In the opposite, the discussion here just goes to another way by valuing the perspective from the practitioner, the one who is feeling, living the experiences while the creative processes are ongoing or even after that, by searching the reminiscences still pulsating within their bodies.
Another aspect that should be aware is regarding the difference between the perspectives addressed by the discussions related to the theatricality in order to avoid misunderstandings with the concepts addressed along through this article. Féral (1988) reflected about the theatricality as a way from which the imaginaries’ structures could be found in some sort of sense in the performing artists’ presence. However, the ways as they occur weren’t explained by Féral (1988). On the other hand, this author mentioned above, when addressing theatricality, also identified that, in a certain way, this aspect expresses a sort of imaginary crossing, manifested in-between the dynamic of the displacement relationship during the sensitive share moment, where the otherness confronting space occurs through the actor’s body. With different approaches and proposals, the discussions made by Féral (1988) may pursue some reverberations from what was stated previously by Stanislavski and Meyerhold, which also reflected on the theatrical event itself to understand the relationship aroused from the moment when artists were performing and the audience sharing this, and by through it to understand the theatricality.
This discussion is brought here to highlight a possible misunderstanding about reflexions on corporeity, corporality, corporeality, and embodiment may have if they mix the traditional overlooks about the theatricality, as mentioned. Although the discussions regarding theatricality find some agreement and relevance when addressing the playfulness relationship, as an entity regarding the actor’s body, these proposals can be considered as an outsider’s viewpoint. They don’t search for the understanding about how it is processed within the artist’s body from the practitioner viewpoint. This critic can be considered if we move the look from the theatrical event to the creative process.
The paradigm change proposed through this article also intends to move the look regarding the discussions that can be proposed through the performing artists’ creative processes from the perspective of the outsiders to the ones who are living these experiences through their own bodies and voices as the matrices in which the reflections are created, potentialized, pondered, understood, and reverberated. As discussed by Féral (2009), many times the knowledge produced about these aspects have focused on the understandings about the creative processes conditioned by the director’s look, which often is considered a certain type of pedagogy, hierarchically imposing the look about how actors can be guided in order to find the results needed for a specific theatre proposal.
A way to comprehend the relevance about the perspective direction change, can be found by analysing what Sullivan (2016) addressed by discussing that the understandings, experiences, and performances of the body are also historically and culturally situated, being able of generating a certain type of knowledge that comes from experiences embedded within, sustained by, and thoroughly permeated by something that exceeds the experiences lived through the body. In the discussion proposed here, it is believed that the way as performing artists work their creative processes, as such Vargas (2018) referred, can illustrate the arguments above and indicate directions that will help on the understanding about how it is really processed. The aspects regarding the subjectivity not being disconnected from the body-voice as a potentializer for the experiences, and a ground for another type of knowledge, without being apart from the surroundings as an ecologically perspective context withing possible relationships, opens up the opportunity to understand how the vocal-bodily experiences lived during the creative process can generate a singular learning-knowledge-understanding process, characteristically potentialized by the performing artists who drive their works in this way.
For this reason, addressing discussions encompassed by the concepts related to the nuances involved in the contexts regarding corporeality, corporality, corporeity, and embodiment can lead us to new reflections about the dynamization of knowledge, and processes usually focused on the researches developed in the educational area, as well. In this perspective, the performing arts can contribute to new reflections, as made by Vargas (2018) about the ways as the cognitive-affective-significative processes can be operationalized.
Final considerations
The researches in the performing arts areas, beyond the theoretical, practical, and methodological foundation, must be aware that some choices regarding terminologies and concepts can show if the study is coherent or not, regarding how it was planned. This aspect can be seen as a simple and initial step when preparing yourself for a work like this. Moreover, as addressed through this article, it has another layer of importance when we consider the practice-based research in performing arts, as it can contribute to enhance a more robust epistemological ground for the proposed research. Nonetheless, we must be alert because confusions at the starting goals may lead to inadequate findings, as well as fragile research processes.
The example used through this article, by addressing the work developed by Vargas (2018), showed different ways that each concept-path can influence in the findings. However, it is important to mention that this author also addressed the aspects of corporeity, corporality, corporeality, and embodiment together along through his thesis. The way it was done, consisted by dividing them into parts (chapters), in which each one was specific regarding each aspect discussed. Thus, corporeity elements can be considered in the chapters regarding the techniques developed and worked during the field work. Corporality elements can be seen in the chapters addressing the potentialities regarding the sensitive share moments. As this author, also worked his theatrical-poetical experiment using a character, the chapters addressing this, can be considered encompassing the discussions regarding embodiment. On the other hand, although we can consider the concept of corporeality as the major one guiding the work developed by Vargas (2018), it was elucidative when the chapters about the potentialities regarding the reverberations from the field work, provided subsidies to reflect broadly into other ways to consider the cognitive-affective-significative processes, another reflexive instance proposed by this author regarding the education area.
Although the discussions concerning each terminology/concept were divided through this text, it was done just to highlight the possible differences amongst them. However, it is also important to expose that they can all be addressed in the same research, as long as the differences and specificities of each one and when to work them are clear to the artist-researcher.
Researches in which the creative processes can be part as one of the steps, allow performing artists to reflect about distinct elements from the perspective of their specificity area. By addressing corporeity, corporeality, corporality, and embodiment as reflexive viewpoints, these professionals can potentialize singular findings, dynamized from experiences aroused from the body-voice. Within this regard, body and vocal work can assume several ways as research interests.
There are many ways in which body and vocal work can act as the means through the research field and how they will lean over along through creative processes. The coherence within each frame works, associated with conceptual addressing regarding corporeity, corporeality, corporality, and embodiment can open other perspectives for future researches in the areas encompassed by the performing arts.
REFERENCES
ARTAUD, Antonin. O teatro e seu duplo. São Paulo/SP: Max Limonad, 1984.
ARTAUD, Antonin. Linguagem e vida: São Paulo/SP: Perspectiva, 2008.
BARBA, Eugenio; SAVARESE, Nicola. A arte secreta do ator: dicionário de antropologia teatral. Tradução de Luís Otávio Burnier (Supervisão). Campinas/SP: Hucitec Editora da UNICAMP, 1995.
BARBA, Eugenio. A terra de cinzas e diamantes: Minha aprendizagem na Polônia. São Paulo/SP: Perspectiva, 2006.
BARBA, Eugenio. Queimar a casa: origens de um diretor. São Paulo/SP: Perspectiva, 2010.
BIELAS, Jacek; ABRAMCIÓW, Rafal. Dimensions of corporeality. A metatheoretical analysis of anthropologists’ concern with the human body. Forum Philosophicum, v. 14, issue 1, p. 133-143, 2009.
BOGART, Anne; LANDAU, Tina. The viewpoints book: a practical guide to viewpoints and composition. New York/USA: Theatre Communications Group, 2005.
FÉRAL, Josette. La théâtralité: la spécificité du langage théâtral. Poétique, Paris, p. 347-361, 1988.
FÉRAL, Josette. Teatro performativo e pedagogia. Sala Preta, v. 09, p. 255-267, 2009.
FOSTER, Susan Leigh. Choreographing Empathy: Kinesthesia in Performance, London/UK: Routledge, 1st Edition, 2010.
GROTOWSKI, Jerzy. La voix. In.: Le théâtre. 1971. Paris: Christian Borgois, 1971.
GROTOWSKI, Jerzy. Em busca de um teatro pobre. Rio de Janeiro/RJ: Civilização Brasileira, 1992.
LAKOFF, George; JOHNSON, Mark. Philosophy in the flesh: the embodied mind and its challenge to western thought. New York/USA: Basic Books, 1999.
LEPECKI, André. Singularities: Dance in the Age of Performance. New York/USA: Routledge, 1st Edition, 2016.
MERRIAM-WEBSTER. Merriam-Webster Dictionary. https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary, 2024.
OIDA, Yoshi. O ator invisível. São Paulo/SP: Beca Produções Culturais, 2001.
PHELAN, Peggy. Unmarked: The Politics of Performance. London/UK: Routledge, 1993.
QUEIROZ, Lela. Corporalização: BMC em dança. Revista Urdimento, n. 19, p. 41-51, 2012.
SOUZA, Elisa Teixeira. Embodiment (corporalização), soma e dança: alguns nexos possíveis. Brazilian Journal on Presence Studies, v. 10, n.4, p. 1-30, 2020.
THOMPSON, Della. The concise Oxford Dictionary of current English. 9th Edition. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1995.
SCHECHNER, Richard. Performance Theory. London/UK: Routledge, 2006.
SULLIVAN, Sian. (Re)embodying which body? Philosophical, cross-cultural and personal reflections on corporeality. Chapter 6. In.: Pellicer-Thomas, R.; de Lucia, V.; SULLIVAN, S. (eds.). Contributions to Law, Philosophy and Ecology: Exploring re-embodiments. London/UK: Glass House Books, Routledge Law, Justice and Ecology Series, p. 199-138, 2016.
VARGAS, Vagner de Souza. Dramaturgia da corporeidade: A pedagogia do evento teatral. [Tese de Doutorado]. Programa de Pós-Graduação em Educação, Doutorado em Educação, Universidade Federal de Pelotas (UFPEL), Pelotas/RS, Brasil, 2018.
VARGAS, Vagner de Souza. Corporeidade vocal e a pesquisa acadêmico-artística. Revista Boitatá, n. 31, p. 9-25, 2021a.
VARGAS, Vagner de Souza. Metodologia para a pesquisa em artes performativas: Encontrando elementos por meio de um experimento poético-teatral. Revista Sinais de Cena, v. 2, n. 5, p. 197-211, 2021b.
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International (CC BY-NC 4.0)
Notas