“This volume absolutely blew me away. … It models what edited volumes can and should do as original contributions to academic research.” Review by Emily Wilcox in Dance Research.
Wilcox, Emily. “Review of The Routledge Companion to Butoh Performance, by B. Baird & R. Candelario.” Dance Research: The Journal of the Society for Dance Research 37, no. 2 (2019): 268–69. DOI: 10.3366/drs.2019.0280; https://www.jstor.org/stable/26851839.
[268] Butoh, an avant-garde art form developed in 1960s Japan that expanded into a worldwide phenomenon by the end of the twentieth century, has received more attention in English-language scholarship than any other dance practice from East Asia. Numerous book-length studies, including most recently two by the editors of this volume, examine in detail the artistic oeuvres of major butoh or butoh-adjacent artists such as Hijikata Tatsumi, Ohno Kazuo, Eiko and Koma, and others, while also examining the histories, artistries, and politics of butoh in Japan and around the globe. For this reason, I was admittedly skeptical of what a new collection of essays on butoh might really offer. Reading this volume, however, absolutely blew me away. Not only does its depth and breadth greatly exceed anything previously available in English on the subject – making it required reading for any scholar, practitioner, or student with even a passing interest in butoh – it also models what edited volumes can and should do as original contributions to academic research. The book is organized into six sections: (1) butoh instigators and interlocutors; (2) the second generation; (3) new sites for butoh; (4) politics, gender, identity; (5) pedagogy and practice, and (6) beyond butoh. The first three sections move roughly chronologically and spatially outward from the origins of butoh in 1960s Japan. They start by examining the artistic work and legacies of the two recognized founders of butoh Hijikata and Ohno, and then they move on to their many students and protégés, emphasizing how artists from different generations constantly transform and reinvent butoh in new places and times. The latter three sections return to these themes but through different lenses – first butoh as gendered political action, then experiences of learning and teaching butoh, and finally artistic practices that challenge or push the boundaries of butoh as an artistic medium. One of the book’s greatest strengths is the vast expertise it brings together from around the world. Essays come from scholars and practitioners working in Asia, the Americas, Europe, Africa, and the South Pacific, offering a genuine sense of the global significance of this art form and the ways in which it speaks to vastly different social conditions and personal experiences. Fully one quarter of the essays (fourteen out of fifty-six) are published in translation, making the book an unprecedented source for multilingual perspectives on butoh. The many rich illustrations further enhance this sense of diverse voices, bodies, and [269] approaches represented in the volume, while serving as useful visual references for performances described and analyzed in the texts. One highlight for me in reading this book was the attention it pays not only to the development of butoh as an artistic practice but also to the competing interpretive discourses that surround it. The book addresses, head-on, problematic aspects of butoh discourse ranging from essentializing accounts produced by early Japanese writers, exoticization and mystification in foreign media, the whitewashing of certain racial references and inspirations, and the persistent myth of butoh’s association with the atomic bomb. It also shows how the particular histories of international tours and local reception shaped how butoh was understood differently in different countries and linguistic spheres. In sum, this is a field-defining text, lucidly written and accessible, perfect for use in the classroom and illuminating for novices and experts alike.
“Well organized and far-ranging, anyone working in performance studies, and related fields, should find more than one section useful, thought-provoking and/or informative.” Review by Uchino Tadashi, Gakushuin Women’s College, in Theatre Research International.
Uchino, Tadashi. “The Routledge Companion to Butoh Performance.” Theatre Research International 45, no. 2 (July 2020): 222–23. doi:10.1017/S0307883320000188.
The Routledge Companion to Butoh Performance is a long-awaited comprehensive academic companion on butoh; a dance performance genre that has undergone fascinating, yet sometimes annoying (in the sense that emotional responses were the norm, particularly in Japan), reception and representation in different socio-politico-cultural quarters of the globe.
Consisting of six sections with fifty-five chapters, this gigantic volume sheds truly intercultural and interdisciplinary light on butoh practice, with the guidance of its knowledgeable editors Bruce Baird and Rosemary Candelario.
Although the ‘advent of butoh in 1960s Japan was a major innovation in 20th century dance and performance, not only in Japan but around the world’ (p. 1), the term butoh has earned significant historical and culture-specific discursive and performative layering that warrants much explicating and unpacking. The book does this – peeling off a thick, somewhat mythic skin of butoh, layer by layer, with care – thus fulfilling its purpose of ‘tracing a fuller history of the form than has been previously available and developing a rigorous analysis and critique of the full range of butoh practice and discourse’ (p. 14).
Following a carefully written introduction by the two editors, including a detailed and nuanced discussion of ‘A Brief History of Butoh’, the book opens with Section 1, ‘Butoh Instigators and Interlocutors’, which includes some important documents written in Japan during the emergence of butoh in the 1960s and 1970s by prominent figures like Mishima Yukio and Shibusawa Tatsuhiko, as well as writings by younger generations of theoretically [223] well-informed academics like William Marotti, Arimitsu Mitsuo and Sara Jansen. The section succeeds in providing a ‘broad range of discursive contexts in which butoh has been talked about and theorized thus far, including early Japanese commentary and reviews’ (p. 15),
incorporating a variety of critical essays on Ohno Kazuo and Hijikata Tatsumi, the two most important artists whose presence defined the genre of butoh.
Section 2 ‘The Second Generation’, looks at butoh performers who worked with Hijikata such as Maro Akaji and Kasai Akira, and discusses how those artists expanded notions of butoh even as they continued to perform on their own terms. Section 3, ‘The new sites for butoh’, focuses ‘on the international spread of butoh through the performance and teaching
activities of Japanese dancers outside of Japan and the travels of non-Japanese dancers to Japan to study’ (p. 15). Those familiarized with butoh through contextual channels ‘other’ than Japan may find the latter section insightful to understand historical and theoretical trajectories of what Candelario terms ‘global and local butoh’ (p. 245).
Section 4, ‘Politics, Gender, Identity’, examines current butoh practice and its discourse, focusing on some critical attempts to create ‘new philosophy and push forward current critical conversations’ (p. 18). One example is a very provocative interview with butoh practitioner/ transactivist Shakina Nayfack by Jacquelyn Marie Shannon. Their dialogue, according to
Shannon, went ‘beyond the body and into the realm of alterity, spirit, and magic – a critical consideration, we agreed, for understanding the transformative power of butoh work’ (p. 388).
The transmission of knowledge is inevitably a critical issue in complicatedly intertwined intercultural and interdisciplinary practice(s) such as butoh. Section 5, ‘Pedagogy and Practice’, addresses this matter and ‘provides a foundation in butoh pedagogy under Hijikata and other early companies, while also presenting a range of practitioner and scholarly perspectives on
butoh pedagogy and practice’ (p. 18). Especially interesting are essays dealing directly with first-hand experience of butoh training and how the trainee as artist/scholar verbally articulates what they went through.
The companion concludes with Section 6, ‘Beyond Butoh’, which ‘provides a glimpse into some of those artists and activities on the edge of the butoh idiom’ (p. 19). Starting with a critical account by Zack Fuller of Tanaka Min’s career as founder of the training methodology known as Body Weather, the section expands its scope with essays and interviews dealing with diverse topics, including films connected to butoh and theoretical and personal writings about, on, and around butoh.
The book leaves readers with the sense of wanting to explore more of the different veins of butoh studies, through each small yet intellectually, personally and artistically productive way. Well organized and far-ranging, anyone working in performance studies, and related fields, should find more than one section useful, thought-provoking and/or informative.
“This is a stout, well-organized reader that significantly enriches the form, solidifying its contributions to and place on the global stage.” Review by Alissa Cardone in TDR.
Cardone, Alissa. 2020 “The Routledge Companion to Butoh Performance ed. by Bruce Baird and Rosemary Candelario (review).” TDR 64, no. 2 (May 20, 2020): 180–82. https://doi.org/10.1162/dram_r_00931
[180] The Routledge Companion to Butoh Performance, edited by Bruce Baird and Rosemary Candelario, is singular in its effort to create a comprehensive collection of histories, critiques, and analyses of the evolving global dance form, butoh. Foregrounding the dances and the dancers that catalyzed and continue to evolve butoh, insightful new essays accompany foundational ones, broadening our understanding of butoh’s influences and developments beyond the evident Eurocentric avantgarde lineages already well explored. This is a stout, well-organized reader that significantly enriches the form, solidifying its contributions to and place on the global stage, while attempting to amend tendencies to sensationalize, orientalize, and misunderstand its nature. No prior histories of butoh have been able to capture so much range in a single volume. The reader contains essays by both emerging and established scholars and practitioners, and includes more than 75 figures, mainly black-and-white photographs (many from personal collections). The companion is a valuable contribution to the fields of dance, theatre, performance, Japanese studies, and Asian studies.
Following a strong introduction cowritten by Baird and Candelario, section 1, “Butoh instigators and interlocutors,” packs 19 essays with a focus on butoh’s roots in Japan, emphasizing the work of Hijikata Tatsumi and Ohno Kazuo. The articles include early reviews that do not simply regurgitate the known but aim to deepen our understanding of these prominent founding artistic figures by placing butoh in its “historical, dance and performance studies contexts” (14). Of particular interest is an article by Arimitsu Michio, who reconsiders the source of Hijikata’s early obsession with darkness and reveals an entirely new perspective on butoh as the so-called dance of utter darkness. In 1957, Hijikata saw a performance by Katherine Dunham in
Tokyo. Dunham’s staging of black female sexuality made a lasting impression on Hijikata, and Arimitsu speculates to what degree Dunham’s work may have informed choices Hijikata made in the seminal work Kinjiki (1959). Other highlights include William Marotti’s essay, “The problematics of butoh and the essentialist trap,” and Lucia Schwellinger’s “Ohno Kazuo: biography and methods of movement creation.” Marotti’s is an important essay in its attempts to rescue butoh from the discursive historicizing that closed it down to interpretations, a move that went against the very fabric of its emergent, slippery experimentalism. Schwellinger’s article,
translated from German into English for the first time, provides insight into the highly personal sources and universal themes that motivated Ohno’s improvisational dance style, while [181] considering the accessibility of his work in comparison to Hijikata’s. Her movement analysis beautifully describes how Ohno’s gestures and body positioning operate: grand and emotional in imagistic origin, yet minimal, quotidian, light, and therefore relatable to a wider audience. Rounding out this section are essays that tackle subjects such as the legacy of Antonin Artaud in Hijikata’s work, the relationship of Hijikata to the nonconformist literary translator Shibusawa
Tatsuhiko, and butoh in media and in the photography of Hosoe Eikoh’s famous Kamaitachi series (1969).
Focusing on the often neglected second generation, section 2 examines the adaptations of butoh by Hijikata’s disciples. Looking at methodologies, genealogies, career trajectories, physical techniques, and/or the personal philosophies of dancer-cum-legends such as Kasai Akira, Maro Akaji, and Sankai Juku founder Amagatsu Ushio, we gain insight into how early encounters with Hijikata led to their own innovations. Highlights of this section include SU-EN’s passionately written reflection on the impressive career of the inimitable dancer Ashikawa Yoko, Katja Centonze’s mapping of Murobushi Ko’s trailblazing international impact, and Megan V.
Nicely’s article revealing the intricacies of Kasai’s often misunderstood eurythmy-infused hyperdrive version of butoh.
The third section of the reader, “New sites for butoh,” begins with an insightful essay by Candelario scrutinizing butoh’s international proliferation by asking questions such as, “What does it mean for butoh to have a passport?” and “What exactly is migrating, and for what purpose?”
Candelario points out an essential flaw in the early academic writing on butoh, which implied that it was an impenetrable, mystical, wholly Japanese phenomenon, and instead refocuses the discussion on the reality of butoh’s global circulations, which drove its development and adaptations. Coining the term “butoh diaspora,” Candelario asks us to look at where, why, and what dancers did in various locations — what she calls the “butoh pilgrimages” and the “new local butohs” — citing examples of each, acknowledging the vitality of the form, and indicating ways that these transnational movements have the capacity for profound innovation. This pivotal chapter acts as a GPS for the 10 essays that follow. Launched into that diaspora, the reader visits France, Italy, Brazil, Germany, Mexico, the US, Iraq, Australia, and Korea; becomes deeply immersed in local butohs; and begins to envision a scintillating map of international hubs where
butoh has taken hold and done its work to intervene in the status quo, challenge, unsettle, and deeply charm.
In “A history of French fascination with butoh,” Sylviane Pagès contemplates butoh’s success in France, tracing who became legendary and who was disregarded in the 40-year relationship. In her essay, Maria Pia D’Orazi outlines how butoh spread through Italy in the 1980s when
performances by Ohno, Kasai, Sankai Juku, and Tanaka Min migrated from France, enraptured audiences, and ushered in a period of what she describes as “aesthetic seduction.” D’Orazi’s essay shows how the presence of Japanese master butoh educators in Italy changed lives: with a desire to share and mentor, Kasai encouraged Italian dancers to “build an originally Italian butoh,” and they did. Section 3 concludes with an intriguing article about the work of Iraqi artist Anmar Taha, who explores the relationship of politically oriented dance to 20th-century war in his butoh-inspired performance The Baldheaded (2005).
Section 4 explores butoh as political protest and as a site for gender bending and identity exploration. Here, a few highlights include Chiayi Seetoo’s discussion of Japanese butoh artist Hata Kanoko’s social activist work with Yellow Butterfly, a butoh troupe founded in 2005 in Taiwan, as well as Carla Melo’s essay on the LA-based activist performance group Corpus Delicti (2003–2008). The section closes with an interview conducted by Jacquelyn Marie Shannon with trans butoh artist Shakina Nayfack, addressing the connection between Nayfack’s trans identity and her experiences of butoh.
Section 5 addresses pedagogy and practice starting with a revealing essay by Caitlin Coker told through recollections of what life was really like (grueling, exhausting, dehumanizing) living and training as an apprentice with Hijikata at Asbestos Kan in the 1970s. Although the [182] reverence
and fascination with Hijikata’s compelling and provocative legacy is understandable, the telltale descriptions in Coker’s article made me wonder if it’s time the field take a closer look at his ruthlessness and the abuses of power and misogyny evident in his methodology and further carried on by some of his disciples. An essay that directly addresses this topic would not
only strengthen this section of the reader, it would contribute to the work being done elsewhere in the field of dance to expose male-dominated hierarchies that have for too long gone unchallenged. Perhaps something like the rousing essay “Misogyny in the Dance World” that was independently published online in 2017 by the respected NYC-based butoh artist Vangeline would be a strong addition. That article unabashedly took on power dynamics and gender inequality in dance, with central examples drawn from Vangeline’s personal experience training in the 2000s with Mexican butoh artist Diego Piñon, in whose workshops concussions, broken
bones, shaming, and other distasteful violations were commonplace. Although other chapters in the companion, such as Tanya Calamoneri’s essay on butoh pedagogy, reference the myriad manifestations of these power dynamics, the existence and consequences of such conventions
must be squarely debated.
In the final section, “Beyond butoh,” the reader will find essays about Tanaka Min’s Body Weather work and career, Oguri’s LA-based Body Weather Laboratory, cinematic forms and butoh film, and an account of how butoh affected the work of visual artist Lucile Druet, as well
as reflections by US-based interdisciplinary performing artists Michael Sakamoto and Shinichi Iova-Koga.
Butoh is a powerful global dance form that deserves recourse and acknowledgment. The Routledge Companion to Butoh Performance stomps forward, expanding on butoh’s unique origins and resonances as an important movement that continues to inspire and propel contemporary
forms and ideas.
Alissa Cardone is an award-winning choreographer, performer, teacher, and curator who specializes in collaborations bridging dance, film, music, technology, and fine art. She trained with Tanaka Min on Body Weather Farm in 1999 and 2001, and studied and performed with Kasai Akira in Nobody Eve (2003) and Butoh America (2005). She is Associate Professor of Dance at Boston Conservatory at Berklee, makes intermedia performances with Kinodance, and is a member of the Mobius Artist Group.
www.kinodance.org; amcard1@gmail.com
“I honestly cannot think of a performing art that would benefit more from a weighty “Companion” volume.” Review by Michelle Liu Carriger in Asian Theatre Journal.
Carriger, Michelle Liu. “The Routledge Companion to Butoh Performance Ed. by Bruce Baird and Rosemary Candelario (Review).” Asian Theatre Journal 38, no. 2 (October 13, 2021): 591–94.
Rife with divergent practitioners, a proliferating penumbra of related and descended performers, and saturated with unreliable histories born of self-orientalizing Japanese explanations as well as lost-in-translation exoticisms and partial understandings perpetuated as butoh—I honestly cannot think of a performing art that would benefit more from a weighty “Companion” volume. Routledge’s admirable effort to fill this gap, under the guidance of editors Bruce Baird (who provided many of the volume’s English translations) and Rosemary Candelario (who collaborated with Baird on the introduction and contributed another essay on the global dissemination of butoh), features 61 contributors in 56 chapters over 558 pages.
What emerges from reading straight through the volume is not a unified story; this is appropriate for a shaggy, complex, and internally discontinuous form like butoh. In the text divergent ideas are juxtaposed (for example, some pieces espouse the ideology of Nihonjinron, “the theory of Japanese uniqueness,” while others, notably William Marotti’s, Sara Jansen’s, and Inata Naomi’s, are precisely geared toward breaking down such assumptions) and different authors employ widely varying methods and styles.1 These styles range from the typographically poetic (Bronwyn Preece) to personal diary-esque accounts (Freehill, Adamenko, and Vesey, among others) to manifestos and more standard academic essays. The variety of textual modes echo the experimental form(s) of butoh itself, within which one of the most uniform features across many companies and choreographers is a paradoxical reliance on and profusion of text and oral communication simultaneous with the frequent confounding or negation of language as a meaning making practice (This is detailed in the text in Marenzi’s [591] description of Hijikata’s notebooks 144, van Hensbergen’s article on Hijikata’s butoh notation, or Ohno’s primarily verbal direction as
described by Schwellinger 115, Freehill 437, and Vesey 452). Butoh retains a certain fundamental tension with or even antipathy to rational and linguistic explanations, occasionally lending an oxymoronic quality to scholarly writing on it. Chapters are very short and therefore unable
to encompass detailed overarching theorizing or historicizing, so a reader probably requires some prior butoh experience to use this work or, perhaps better yet, access to video and/or live performances.
The first three sections function as a roughly chronological and generational history of butoh dance where the first two generations take place largely within Japan, and the transition from second to third encompasses the international spread of butoh. “Butoh Instigators and Interlocutors” encompasses short articles on Hijikata Tatsumi and Ohno Kazuo, including several that excavate little-discussed foreign influences, particularly on Hijikata (Katherine Dunham, Antonin Artaud, and German neuer Tanz) and some contemporaries with potential impacts on the development of butoh, like Oikawa Hironobu and critics Shibusawa Tatsuhiko and Mishima Yukio. Two short excerpts from each of these critics on Hijikata’s butoh are also translated and included. In the next section, “The Second Generation,” articles address the work and methods of Dairakudakan and Maro Akaji, Kasai Akira, Ashikawa Yoko, Bishop Yamada, Muroboshi K?, and Sankai Juku. Maro, through his concept of “one person, one school,” fostered the splintering and amplification of butoh in diverse choreographers, companies, and methods; this is noted in the Dairakudakan chapter in a convenient chart. “New Sites for Butoh” traces a transnational third generation of butoh practices in geographically specific places, demonstrating that, as Candelario describes “butoh has not so much
become global as it has become multiply local” (p. 251). The third section’s articles cover France, Italy, Germany, Sweden, Brazil, Mexico, and the United States (in chapters covering the butoh festivals in San Francisco and New York City), as well as butoh-inspired performance in Iraq and an Australian-Korean collaboration.
Section four focuses on different issues like gender, political protest, issues of appropriation and the ethics of the transnational spread of culturally marked practices, while bringing in cases from Taiwan, Mexico, the United States, and New Zealand. Section five on “Pedagogy and Practice” contains some of the most personal writing, as it focuses on documenting the daily practices of different dance companies and individuals’ experiences in butoh training. Caitlin Coker’s chapter on “The Daily Practice of Hijikata Tatsumi’s Apprentices from 1969 to 1978” is one of my favorites from the
[592] volume, full of revelations about the mundane (or not so mundane)
daily lives of Hijikata dancers. Reading this section overall made me realize a common blindspot in other work on butoh that focuses almost exclusively on performances without paying attention to the sustained, repetitive modes of practice that underwrite live performances and constitute such an important foundation of what makes butoh butoh. Such a bias toward the “event” is surely understandable in that most if not all of performance scholarship is geared toward analyzing the actual given-to-be-seen performance. Moreover, critics are far more privy to the performance event than the grind of live-in company lifestyle and the world-spanning scope of the butoh workshop circuit. It was therefore this section, filled with personal recollections from dancers, that struck me as particularly novel and illuminating material for those who come to butoh from a scholar’s, viewer’s, or critic’s perspective.
It is hard to imagine a sufficient conclusion to such a sprawling undertaking as this collection, so perhaps it is appropriate that the volume largely eschews any attempt at that by instead concluding with a section called “Beyond Butoh” featuring articles on Tanaka Min (who eschews the label butoh, and yet whose work, at least outside Japan, has remained entangled with it) and his Body Weather System, the Los Angeles Body Weather offshoot helmed by Oguri and Roxanne Steinberg, and other dance and performance endeavors in dialogue with and influenced by butoh. One implicit effect of this ending, in particular Shinichi Iova-Koga’s concluding essay, is to leave the reader with a general sense of butoh as fully enmeshed in a larger textual and aesthetic fabric of avant-garde, experimental, and postmodern activities as both a descendent and a progenitor of fundamentally cosmopolitan and international art practices. Such an impression seems both appropriate and potentially new, as butoh may slowly be shedding its reputation as a uniquely and singularly Japanese art. The ramifications of a de-exotification of butoh may also hopefully extend into a more balanced understanding of other Japanese-identified arts as well. The effect of the book as a whole is perhaps more of a kaleidoscope than a mosaic or collage: a larger picture of an important avant-garde
performance form emerges not as a singular image, but as innumerable
smaller images, endlessly diverging and converging, refracting and amplifying ideas about what butoh is, does, was, can be, and will be.
“Through its variety and volume, it lets us really feel the unfolding of the ‘Butoh Diaspora'” [??????????????????“butoh diaspora”???????????????] Review in Japanese by Tomita Daisuke in Choreologia.
Tomita Daisuke (?? ??). 2019. “Book Review Bruce Baird and Rosemary Candelario (Eds.), The Routledge Companion to Butoh Performance.” ??? [Choreologia] 2019, no. 42 (2019): 66. doi:10.11235/buyougaku.2019.42_66.
???????? ??????????????????????????????????????????????????????????1????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????60?????????????????????????????57???????600?????
?????????????????Bruce Baird???????????????????? ????Rosemary Candelario????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????19?????????????20 ?25???????????????26 ?36??????????????????????????????37 ?41???????????????42 ?49???????????????50 ?56????????????????????????????????????????15??????????????
???20??????????????57?????????????????????????????????“butoh diaspora”?Candelario, 245????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????Baird????????? Robert Ono
???????????
????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????
???????????????????TrajalHarrell???????????????????????????70????????????
????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????
???????????????????????????????
????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????15????????????19????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????——??????——???????
???????????????????????“trans-Pacific remaking of blackness”??????????1959????????????????????????????Afro-diasporic cultures??????????????????????——????????——?????????????????????????????????????????????????????
?????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????10???William Marotti?11???Sara Jansen?12???Marotti?Jansen????????????????????????????????????????????Marotti???????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????Peter Eckersall?17?????????????
??????????????????????????????Jonathan W. Marshall?18????????????“photographic butoh”????????????????????????????????
???????????????20???????21????????22???????????23???????24????????????25????????????????????SU-EN??????????????????????????????????????????????? [67]??????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????
??????????????????????????????????????????????Candelario????“????????????????”???????26????????????????????????????????????????SU-EN?Diego Piñón????????????????????????????????????Sylviane Pagès????
???????????????27???????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????2017????????????????????????????????28?Maria Pia D’Orazi????????????????????????????
?????????????????????29?Rosa van Hensbergen??1980??????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????31?Christine Greiner????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????
??????????????Chiayi Seetoo??????????????38??????Seetoo???????????????????????????????????????????????????“butoh action”??
??????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????
?????????????????????????????????????????????????????????“inter-Asian transnationalism”???????????????????????Miki Seifert??????
?????????????????41????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????401??
?????????????????????????????????????????Caitlin Coker??1969-1978???????????????????42????????????????????????????- ?????
??????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????Tanya Calamoneri—— ???Coker???????????????——??????? ??????????????43??????????????????????????????????????????????????
???????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????4 4 4 ?????????????????????????????????419????????????????????????????????????????????????
?????????????????????????50???????????????????????????????51?????????????????????????????52?53?????????????????????????55??????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????54???????????????????????????????????Catherine Diverrès????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????519-520???????????????????????????????????????????????????????? Ô Senseï ????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????corporeality???????????????????????????523?????????????????????????????????????????????