Scholarly research in the field of dance begins with the methodological premise that some things are only effectively known through their enactment. This article utilizes movement practice as a site for cultural research. The imminent, fluctuating and heightened physicality of movement research, reconstructed here in writing, contributes a different perspective toward the understanding of authenticity in relation to the construction of knowledge. The article is written in the present tense from the perspective of the protagonist to convey the ethnographic site in progress, and to highlight the visceral aspect of the issues at hand.
Albright, A.C. (1997). Choreographing Difference. Middletown, CT: Wesleyan University Press.
2.
Barba, E. (2000). The deep order called turbulence. The Drama Review44, 4.
3.
Behar, R. (1999). Ethnography: Cherishing our second-fiddle genre . Journal of Contemporary Ethnography28, 472-484.
4.
Browning, B. (2001). Headspin: Capoeira's ironic inversions. In A. C. Albright & A. Dils (Eds.), Moving History/Dancing Cultures (pp. 103-113). Middletown, CT: Wesleyan University Press.
5.
Butler, J. (1993). Bodies that matter: On the discursive limits of sex. New York: Routledge.
6.
Butler, J. (1997). Performative acts and gender constitution. In K. Conboy, N. Medina, & S. Stanbury (Eds.), Writing on the body: Female embodiment and feminist theory . New York: Columbia University Press.
7.
Denzin, N. (1997). Interpretive ethnography. London: SAGE.
8.
Franko, M. (1993). Dance as text: Ideologies of the Baroque body . Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
9.
Foster, S. (1995). Choreographing History. In S. Foster (Ed.), Choreographing History (pp. 3-21). Bloomington : Indiana University Press.
10.
Jeyasingh, S. (1998). Imaginary homelands: Creating a new dance language . In A. Carter (Ed.), The Routledge dance studies reader (pp. 46-52). London: Routledge.
11.
Lather, P. (1986, winter). Issues of validity in openly ideological research: Between a rock and a soft place. Interchange, 17, (4) 63-84.
12.
Lather, P. (1993). Fertile obsession: Validity after poststructuralism . Sociological Quarterly, 34, 673-693.
13.
Lather, P. (2004). Getting lost: Feminist efforts toward a double(d) science. Paper presented at AERA, San Diego, CA, April 12-16, 2004.
14.
Lyotard, F. (1984). The postmodern condition: A report on knowledge (G. Bennington & B. Massumi, Trans.). Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.
15.
Markula, P. (2001) Traveling with tango: An Ethnographer's stance . In J. LaPointe-Crump (Ed.). Transmigratory moves: Dance in global circulation (pp. 207-213). New York: Congress on Research in Dance, New York University .
16.
Markula, P. (2003). Bodily dialogues. In P. Marula & J. Denison (Eds.), Moving Writing (pp. 27-50). New York: Peter Lang.
17.
Markula, P., & J. Denison (2003). Introduction. In P. Marula and J. Denison (Eds.), Moving writing (pp. 1-24). New York: Peter Lang.
18.
Meduri, A. (2001). Bharatanatyam-What are you? In A. C. Albright & A. Dils (Eds.), Moving history/dancing cultures (pp. 103-113). Middletown, CT: Wesleyan University Press.
19.
Wolf, M. (1992). A thrice told tale: Feminism, postmodernism and ethnographic responsibility. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.
