“Hybridity”, as a noun, usually has the same meaning as “hybrid”. It refers to “a thing made by combining two different elements”. In the text of the “Interculturalism” of the book Dramaturgy in Motion by Katherine Profeta, “hybridity” refers to the intersection and combination of different cultures, genders, and races in the field of choreography and dramaturgy.
While the resistance against power structures and the same structures’ dominance are usually contradictory and cannot coexist, hybridity allows that to happen. Though Ralph’s rehearsal room exercises, Profeta points out that “our conception of identity are at once deeply meaningful and deeply inadequate, and instances of hybridity served well to underline both stances”(171). In my opinion, it means that hybridity makes a person’s identity in the group more distinctive and special, while questioning the use of different identity in such a group. What is more, as quoted by Profeta from Barbara Browning, “as long as cultural and corporeal boundaries are permeable, hybrids will proliferate, though not without consequence”(172). In other words, the combination of different cultures represented in a choreography has potential risks. What the risks could be, however, is something I couldn’t really figure out.
I find this word interesting because I believe hybridity is well represented in the dance workshop of our class. I remember that sometimes Aakash would ask us to make movements with other people. Such action requires the cooperation of two or more different people from very different background. If they complete the action successfully, hybridity in this case would proliferate, but sometimes people from different cultural backgrounds may not be able to complete it with mutual agreement, and conflicts could arise, and that could be the risk indicated by hybridity.
Oxford Dictionaries Accessed 4 Jan 2018. https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/freedom. Profeta, Katherine. 2015. Dramaturgy in Motion: At Work on Dance and Movement Performance. Madison, Wisconsin: The University of Wisconsin Press,
Hi Yaozhong,
This is a great meditation on the function of hybridity and I want to point out a clear instance in the class when we were told of it’s risks. Remember when Aakash told us how many people were offended because he didn’t do “proper” kathak but instead mixed modern choreography with the traditional form? People often feel violated when “pure” forms are corrupted and hybrids proliferate. It offends their sense of order and history. But Aakash is a contemporary dancer who studied kathak, and he’s certainly earned the right to create hybrid forms. But hybrids imply that there is some “loss” of a former form or identity. Sometimes that is thrilling, as hybrids are often stronger and are symbols of cultures entering and affecting one another. But there is a downside to blurring, for it’s hard to retain earlier forms too, unless they are appreciated and can co-exist with the hybrid. When there is hybridity in cultural forms, social organizations too struggle with the loss of a previous identity.