This article was created in collaboration with komplex – KULTURMAGAZIN. komplex – KULTURMAGAZIN is a non-profit cultural association and a platform focused on independent art and culture in Innsbruck and its surroundings. On komplex-kulturmagazin.com, cultural journalism and artistic contributions are regularly published, along with an annual artistic print publication featuring curated content as part of the participatory call for submissions, komPOST. (Instagram)
From August 25th to September 1st, 2024, the sixth edition of the Solo & Contact Improvisation Festival will take place in Tyrol. Founded by Ukrainian dancer and artist Tamara Maksymenko in 2019, the festival has grown into a significant annual event that combines artistic and bodily exploration with socio-political discourses. Tamara's vision has always been to use dance as a medium to engage with these issues, reflecting the roots of Contact Improvisation (CI) as a form of protest and response to social injustices. The origins of CI trace back to the 1970s, founded by Steve Paxton as a radical response to the hierarchies present in American modern dance training. In the wider context of the Vietnam War and the collective impulse of the Judson Church artists – a group of avant-garde dancers and choreographers in New York City who challenged traditional dance norms –, Paxton’s vision for CI was grounded in exploring non-hierarchical, collective movement, emphasizing physical communication and collaboration. Some of the dancers who were part of the initiation of Contact Improvisation include Nancy Stark Smith, Danny Lepkoff, Lisa Nelson, Karen Nelson, Nita Little, Andrew Harwood, Peter Bingham, and Ray Chung.
This year's edition of the Solo & Contact Improvisation Festival continues the tradition of radical responses to political contexts by focusing on themes of migration and the refugee experience within the context of CI and the broader art world. In line with this theme, dancer and researcher Beatriz Herrera Corado has been invited to hold two lectures as part of the event: “De-constructing Inclusion: Contact Improvisation in Diverse Contexts” and “Eppur si muove: A Historical Overview of Contact Improvisation”. Beatriz's background in both dance and ethnochoreology, along with her personal history of migration, makes her an ideal speaker to address these topics.
Tamara explains, “We incorporated lectures with socio-political themes into the festival to encourage reflection on significant issues. Beatriz's insights on diversity and inclusion in CI, as well as her understanding of the historical and political dimensions of the practice, align perfectly with our goals.” Tamara observes that many people in the CI scene participate primarily for the experience of physical touch and body psychotherapy. However, she wants to emphasize technique, constant research, and discourse. “Of course, the mix of people and their individual approaches is beautiful, but for me, it’s essential to understand what the practice was originally about,” she adds.
In the following interview, Beatriz shares her journey with CI, her research, and her perspectives on the importance of socio-political awareness within the dance community, addressing the challenges the scene faces today.
Beatriz, you were invited as a researcher to hold two lectures at this year’s Solo & Contact Improvisation Festival Tyrol. What research have you been doing on CI, and what topics will you cover in these lectures?
My lecture will focus on diversity in the context of Contact Improvisation. "Diversity" refers to addressing differences—social, cultural, or gender. However, these are always political terms. To address diversity means to scrutinize how and why these differences are created and how they produce power imbalances. The goal of addressing "diversity" in contact improvisation is to allow people to engage in their own sense of agency and be who they want to be in a safe space, to have a sense of freedom from political imbalances.
I conducted my field research on CI at summer festivals in 2017. I critically observed the practice of CI, comparing its historical principles with today’s practice. The founders in the '70s in the US, influenced by the peace movement, envisioned CI as a practice against hierarchies. They opposed the idea of a single choreographer dictating movements and reshaped the practice into a more collective, spontaneous engagement. It’s interesting how this resonates with our current, complicated context of Islamophobia and right-wing supremacy. Many people still try to bring this collectiveness into practice, although questions remain like „Who has access to the practice?“ and „How do we bring people from different contexts together by activating the sense of touch?“
As you just mentioned the history of CI, would you say that in the beginning, it was more of an ideological movement than a dance practice?
It was both. Recently, I spoke with another researcher studying improvisational music practices, and he linked them to certain worldviews that we could name as ideologies and life practices, which made them strong and identifiable. This makes you question—are all types of dance ideological, or why do we think they are not? It opens up that perspective. Another specific trait I observed among CI practitioners is their openness to discussing these topics, reinforcing the idea that CI addresses power structures in general. Here, "power" refers to who has the right to decide for others and whether we are all allowed to decide according to our desires, both aesthetically and socially. In my experiences, some practitioners of contact improvisation are not afraid of speaking about such things.
What makes the practice of CI so interesting for you compared to other dance practices you studied?
CI differs because, in ballet or contemporary dance training, most physical work and improvisation are done individually. Interaction usually occurs in composition or theatre classes. In CI, however, it’s taken for granted that we engage in touch with another body, which is something uncommon in everyday life. CI festivals are unique because, unlike in schools or universities where people know each other, at festivals, people who are completely new to each other engage in physical contact. This process is beautiful but can also present challenges, revealing personal boundaries we may not have been aware of.
Is there something you would criticize about how CI is practiced?
I’m critical of the assumption that CI is suitable for everyone. Normalizing this is tricky. The CI community allows you to speak out things you usually wouldn’t speak out or to touch others you normally wouldn’t touch. It breaks many habits and ways of being in everyday life. While this is a wonderful challenge, we cannot assume everyone will feel comfortable, regardless of their background. It’s important to keep the practice open to anyone who wishes to join. This aspect also relates to my topic of diversity.
Regarding the different backgrounds, do you think that cultural background matters in CI, depending on how “normal” it is in your culture to have physical touch compared to other cultures?
Yes, cultural differences in touch are significant. However, there is a risk of falling into stereotypes. For example, in Latin America, where touch is more accepted, it doesn’t mean everyone is comfortable with it. Here, we cannot only fall into assumptions.
CI opens up the field of touch as a unique dimension of life. The technical elements of CI provide the opportunity to talk about, process, and experiment with touch, which is something that we usually wouldn’t do in daily life.
How about your personal experience? When did you start with CI, and were you comfortable with it right at the beginning, or did you also struggle?
I had very good teachers. I started practicing CI in 2015 in the US because, by then, I couldn’t find a CI community in Guatemala, where I’m from. One of my teachers would say, ‘You have to embrace the awkwardness,’ referring to the awkwardness of touching and experimenting with another body. Even with good teachers, such as Ishmael Houston Jones, who insisted on writing before each dance session, there was no discussion about consent or what to do when feeling uncomfortable. Looking back, I realize I might not have been comfortable with everything.
But coming from a rigid ballet dance training background, I was tired of not fitting the ballerina mold. CI, where I could dance with my eyes closed and not worry about form, was liberating. The freedom of CI is something I love, and learning to understand and communicate your boundaries depends a lot on your teacher.
Can you observe some changes in the CI community? Is there now a scene in Guatemala as well? And speaking about consent, do you have the impression there is overall more awareness about it in the scene?
In Guatemala, the community was very small and was affected by the COVID-19 pandemic. Some people organize private jams in Guatemala City, but they are not frequent.
“Consent” is a term recently used in contact improvisation. The #MeToo movement influenced many dance practices, raising awareness among workshop facilitators and in higher education. Many CI groups now have written rules to ensure safety. Maintaining a “safe” space is an ongoing effort that we can never take for granted, and issues must be addressed as they arise.
You are currently doing a PhD at Kunstuni Graz in the field of Ethnomusicology. Can you describe what this area is about? And how is it related to dance?
Ethnomusicology is like anthropology with a focus on music. It studies musical practices beyond just the repertoire, focusing more on the people making music and the types of music they create. This breaks the traditional idea of what music is. Most ethnomusicologists study music cultures worldwide. Many practices, especially in traditional settings, are connected to movement, dance, and theatre. Music is often not isolated; people move while making music, or other activities are happening simultaneously. This is why I research contemporary dance and music—how dancers create music, count it, select and edit it for their training and performances, and what music they prefer to improvise to, even if they aren’t recognized as musicians.
How about the CI scene? Is there a specific type of music involved in improvisation jams, for example?
That’s an interesting question. When I did my fieldwork at the Contact Festival Freiburg in Germany, one of the most important CI festivals, they had guest musicians play live for the jams. They played whatever they liked. Dancers and researchers still don’t agree on how music influences the body in CI because you are focused on following touch. You can choose to follow the music or not, and some people prefer silent practices. There are various opinions, and I don’t think there’s a definitive answer. CI practitioners tend to experiment with all elements included in the practice.
Your PhD project is titled “The Sound of Movement Creation: Post-Colonial Choreographic Musicking in the European Scene of Contemporary Dance.” How is your focus on contemporary dance related to decolonization?
I’m currently searching for migrant choreographers in Vienna, particularly those from the ‘Global South’—countries with histories of colonialism, like those in Latin America, Africa, and Southeast Asia. These regions have traditional dance practices often unrelated to contemporary dance but increasingly included under its umbrella. I’m researching at the IMPULSTANZ festival in Vienna, with Ulduz Ahmadzadeh from Iran, who integrates traditional practices into her creative process, and others like Karine Label from Haiti and Nora Chipaumire from Zimbabwe. I call it ‘post-colonial’ because contemporary dance is connected to various global practices, bringing different genealogies, ontologies and ways of understanding movement and the body. This also relates to the identity of the dancer, which I find very interesting.
It seems almost like a contradiction to have these traditional ethno elements incorporated into contemporary practice, but it is becoming more common, also in music. Do you consider this innovative in the context of contemporary dance?
It is a contradiction, but it’s interesting to explore how and why this happens and what consequences it has. There are cases of cultural appropriation, what I find relevant about this topic. For example, there was a case by choreographer Eszter Salamon who reenacted an indigenous dance from Argentina without understanding it, causing controversy.
“Traditional” contemporary dance techniques are still taught in universities, but they limit innovation because everyone learns the same things. That’s also the reason why CI became such a thing in its time because it offered a space for dancers to do different things and experiment. This was something totally new by that time.
As a final question, what fascinates you personally in your artistic practice at the moment? And in which direction would you like to develop it?
My artistic practice is ongoing in a quiet way. I performed last year after five years offstage. Research is also a practice, even if not called “practice-as-research.” My experiences in Guatemala and Europe have shaped how I ask questions and understand the desire to be an artist. When creating something, I consider what I want to create, and the conditions needed for creation. Being a mobile person finding my way in a new space, I ask myself how my body feels moving here. My last performance was based on nostalgia for the Pacific coast and memories embedded in my body. I am exploring nostalgia and memory as catalysts for new horizons.
Beatriz Herrera Corado's work blends movement techniques with ethnomusicology, focusing on music-dance relations as a PhD candidate at Universität für Musik und darstellende Kunst Graz. Her extensive training includes ballet, modern, contemporary, and West African dance. In 2015, she deepened her improvisation and composition skills at the American Dance Festival. A year later, her perspective on dance shifted after studying the MA program Choreomundus in Norway, leading her to critically examine dance's power dynamics and identity debates. From 2018 to 2023, she curated contemporary dance in Guatemala while conducting fieldwork as an anthropologist.
born in 1993, mostly lives in Tyrol. She completed her master’s studies in Philosophy and Comparative Literature at the University of Innsbruck and is currently pursuing her PhD in Aesthetics and Philosophy of Art. She works as a freelance curator, cultural worker, and cultural journalist, and she leads the non-profit cultural associations komplex-KULTURMAGAZIN and GRUND1535.