That’s just the way it is! Dogmatism in historical dance

Have you suffered from dogmatism in historical dance? Or are you dogmatic? What are you sure you know about historical dance?

Dogmatism :

1. the expression of an opinion or belief as if it were a fact : positiveness in assertion of opinion especially when unwarranted or arrogant
2. a viewpoint or system of ideas based on insufficiently examined premises

Merriam-Webster dictionary

A personal example. During a ball, I taught the Veleta. At the end of the dance, a man came to me, with a knowing smile: “This Veleta is ridiculous, we all agree on that, right?”. I didn’t understand this statement, and asked him what he would have done differently. “Well, normally, at the end, the music speeds up a lot, and you spin around on the spot with your partner” (remark accompanied by an exasperated tone, as if to say, “everyone knows that”).

Ah. Oh. Well, the music I used didn’t speed up (he had just heard it). My music finished gracefully at the end of the melody, not calling for any specific final move”… And the choreographer, Arthur Morris, didn’t mention anything special for the ending. But, as my version differed from this gentleman’s (by exactly 4 bars), it was obiously “nonsense”.

The origins of dogmatisme

People can be particularly dogmatic in the field of historical dancing. However, the discipline is based on the critical mind, the polar opposit of dogmatism. Why do we observe that phenomenon?

La critique historique est contraire à la tournure normale de l’intelligence humaine : la tendance spontanée de l’homme est de croire ce qu’on lui dit.

Historical criticism runs counter to the normal course of human intelligence: man’s spontaneous tendency is to believe what he is told.

Charles Seignobos, La Méthode historique appliquée aux sciences sociales, Alcan, Paris, 1901.

According to Seignobos, human beings tend to believe what they are told, and to believe it wholeheartedly. This is true in all areas, including our own.

Many dancers stick to what they have learned in class. The version they know is the only valid version. They react violently to any version that differs even slightly.

Some dogmas are unshakeable. This is particularly true in cinema. Second anecdote:

Dogmatism and confirmation bias

I gave a lecture about dancing in Jane Austen’s era. One hour, explaining that the dances you saw in the period dramas are not (always) historical, that Jane Austen never danced Mr Beveridge’s Maggot, nor any dances from the Dancing Master. All statements were based on genuine sources, with many examples.

Despite everything, at the end of the talk, a member of the audience called out to me: “Okay, they danced La Boulangère, but they also danced Mr. Beveridge’s Maggot, didn’t they?” I had an urge to rip him apart.

In this case, confirmation bias makes the situation worse.

Biais de confirmation : Il se caractérise par la propension à privilégier les informations qui confortent nos opinions et à rejeter celles qui les contredisent, voire à ne pas en tenir compte.

Confirmation bias: This is characterized by a tendency to favor information that supports our opinions and to reject or even ignore information that contradicts them.

Zoé St-Onge et Serge larivée, “C’est confirmé, point barre! le biais de confirmation au quotidien”, dans Revue internationale de communication et de socialisation, vol. 5, n°2, 2018.

Fortunately, I saw the other audience members giving the unfortunate man dirty looks. All hope is not lost for spreading the truth about this dance, my friends!

Everyone has a tendency toward dogmatism and a propensity for confirmation bias. You, me, internationally recognized researchers, novice amateurs. The purpose of my article is not to stigmatize one group or another, but to alert you to the dangers of dogmatism.

The danger of dogmatism

I am concerned by this dogmatism in general, and in the field of historical dancing.

First, because it is against the historical method. This is by searching and analysing more and more sources that one can reconstruct the fact as accurately as possible. Searchers benefit from challening everything and everyone – themselves included. That’s how their understanding of the dance become more precise and deeper.

Also, that inflexibility is dangerous because it creates division inside our small community. People scream at each other, claiming that they know what is “true”, without bringing arguments and without listening their opponent’s.

Dear historical dance lovers, we have more to gain by discussing and exchanging than by losing our time in pointless quarrels. There are not enough of us to divide ourselves into subgroups that look down on each other.

Why is there no absolute truth in historical dancing, or the origins of the different versions

Several ‘truths’ can coexist at a given time. Depending on the location, social environment, type of occasion (private, public, formal, secret, etc.), the repertoires, styles and steps differ. Some dances have had several versions since their inception (or almost) (e.g. La Tempête).

Furthermore, research is constantly evolving as new discoveries are made and sources are re-examined. So much so that a researcher may change their mind during their career. See how Cécile Laye decided to change her starting foot in English figure dances overnight.

Without going into the anatomical details of dance, I will give you some thoughts on the origin of the differences between reconstructions. Indeed, it is from the process of reconstruction and reassembly that different versions arise.

Remember that a reconstruction is just that: a hypothesis based on historical sources.

Sources open to interpretation

Multiple sources

Sometimes, researchers are fortunate enough to find several sources for a dance. With perseverance, they can reconcile these sources. They then shed light on each other and enable a reconstruction that satisfies all sources.

Other times, the sources contradict each other outright. It is impossible to reconcile them. I had this trying experience with the Aéronette. In such cases, choices must be made: follow one source or the other, or even propose a solution between the two.

Ambiguous sources

The same issue arises when one source contradicts itself. Yes, it happens, and more often than you think. For example, Step Stately, from the Dancing Master, supplies since a while the debates amongst researchers and reenactors. Those debates come from the ambiguity and the vagueness of the text.

See for another example the beginning of Prenes a gard de tribus, from the Gresley manuscript:

After the end of the trace the first man lepe the second lepe the III thred torne

Quoted in Ann & Paul Kent, Cherwell thy wyne. Dances of the fifteenth-century England from the Gresley manuscript, DHDS, 2013.

That short sentence leads the researcher to ask dozens of questions (or more):

• What is a “trace”?
• How are the three dancers positionned (line, circle…)?
• How are the dancers oriented (do they watch each other or to the Presence…)?
• Why three “men”? Are there no women?
• Endless questions!

Choices must be made whenever sources do not allow us to be certain about the action to be taken. All these choices, made by the reconstructor, give rise to versions that are sometimes very different. All these versions are valid as long as they respect the text or are based on solid arguments. The more vague the text, the more valid proposals there are.

In conclusion, I will quote Charles Seignobos once again:

L’historien est dans la position d’un physicien qui ne connaîtrait les faits que par le compte rendu d’un garçon de laboratoire ignorant et peut-être menteur.

The historian is in the position of a physicist who knows the facts only through the account of an ignorant and perhaps dishonest laboratory assistant.

Charles Seignobos, La Méthode historique appliquée aux sciences sociales, Alcan, Paris, 1901.

And this necessarily implies, as costume historian Bernadette Banner so aptly puts it:

There is no such thing as historical accuracy.

Bernadette Banner, in litterally all her videos.

The importance of the sources

When I speak of source, I speak about period documents. ‘We’ve always done it this way’ and ‘My teacher said so’ (to name just the most popular examples) are not valid sources for historical research.

Your teacher also makes choices, even if they are not directly reconstructing the dance. These choices ensure, for example, the coherence of the group during your performances. This does not make them absolute truths.

It is important to distinguish between the choices made during reconstruction and what the text says. And to keep an open mind, welcoming different versions as rich sources of information.

Please understand me: I learned to dance without asking too many questions. And, like you perhaps, I fell flat on my face several times. It is painful to realise that what you are dancing is not at all like what you read in the sources. But this is the path to a more authentic practice.

Where does this tendency towards dogmatism come from? And how can we combat it?

According to Seignobos, whom I quoted in the introduction, dogmatism is inherent in human nature. Is this really the case?

It seems that teaching – the way we teach – plays a part.

Researcher Ellen Langer conducted a study over more than 25 years on teaching methods. She demonstrated that students who are presented with facts as absolute truths tend to use the material without thinking. This leads them to make poor, inappropriate or limited decisions.

On the contrary, students who are presented with facts in a conditional manner (‘it may be this way, but it may be otherwise’) will use the information in a more thoughtful, effective and creative way. They will even appreciate the information more.

An example of conditional teaching

Student: "Which foot do we start with?"

Dogmatic teacher: "The right foot, always the right foot, that's just the way it is and not otherwise"

Conditional teacher n.1: "The source says nothing about the starting foot. Do as you like".

Conditional teacher n.2: "The author did not give us that information. By analogy with the other European dances of the late 16th century, I'd rather have you begin with the left foot."

Conditional teacher n.3: "In the text, they don't say anything. I decided that everyone would begin with the right foot, that will be more cohesive is everyone starts with the same foot during the show."

The students of the dogmatic teacher are more likely to believe that they have the absolute truth. So they could reject quite violently the other teacher's versions. While the students of the other teachers understand that there is no definitive answer to the question of the starting foot.

So, historical dance teachers are in the best place to fight against that endemic dogmatism in their field.

Of course, it is simpler to say “that’s just the way it is, and not otherwise”. However, the students win maturity when the teacher takes the time to explain the choice that he or she made, and the philosophy of the reconstruction.

Conclusion : how to fight against dogmatism?

Dancers, you can also fight against dogmatism. The one of the others, and your own (and even mine).

Do you see a version of a dance that is different from the one you know? Be curious! Dare to ask where this dance comes from, who taught it or reconstructed it in this way. Follow the trail like Sherlock Holmes follows a clue, and find the source!

Dare to question yourself and what you think you know. Yes, even the dances you’ve been doing all your life can reveal surprises!