Critical Correspondence

University Project: Hannah Wiley, Chair of Dance Program, University of Washington, Seattle

in conversation with Maura Donohue

Interview: 03.18.09

Wiley, former Chair of the Five College Dance Department (see Jim Coleman interview) was invited to become chairman of the UW dance program in 1987. In 1990, she founded the Chamber Dance Company, the first professional dance company to be in residence at the University. The company comprises of members of the school’s MFA program, which requires at least 8 years of professional dance experience before applying to the program. The Chamber Dance Company’s mission is to present and record works of historical and artistic significance focusing on both educational and theatrical values.

Maura Donohue: Let’s start by talking about the MFA program since I think it’s a very interesting model and, from what I know, the first of it’s kind in its requirement of professional experience from the candidate.

Hannah Wiley: It’s funny. I was looking at the questions you’d sent and thinking so much of what I built here seems antithetical to what your questions are looking at.

Maura: That’s why I wanted to speak with you. I think you were thinking about opportunities for artists but from a different angle than the ones that might be circulating in the local artist community here in New York.

Hannah: Well, yes. The MFA program was built for artists. The program itself is an opportunity for working artists. It took shape while I was in the Five College Dance Department. Every year I’d watch Gemze deLappe [artist-in-residence] wait until April or May to find out if she had a job the following year. So despite the wonderful gifts she brought to the department, she never had the job security of the professorial ranks. I’d also watch artists come in to teach at any of the five colleges and not understand what general education requirements were or how to work toward tenure. Back in 1987 many working artists were set up to fail in this system. They came with a certain preparation and set of skills ––not necessarily those that are needed to survive and thrive in academia. Artists teaching at studios in the city or offering master classes are often working differently than the academic. It takes a different kind of stamina to teach for 15 weeks to the same kids, week after week, year after year. It’s requires a completely different energy. So, I wanted to create a degree program that addressed that issue. I wanted to create a program that was different from my experience at NYU, where I went to get a graduate degree that I needed in order to receive tenure at Mount Holyoke. I was 35 and required to take nine technique classes a week! This was not what I was looking for. And, I wanted something different than the program I saw at Smith College, which similarly was focused on choreography and performance. I wanted to create a place for people transitioning out of professional performing––who wanted to change the direction of their professional lives.

Maura: That’s a great point. I had a similar experience at Smith, having returned to school at 36 and wondering why I was required to be in technique when I was clearly no longer working towards a career as a dancer. But, it also speaks to the challenge of what an MFA program offers experienced artists, besides a degree so that they can get in the door to academic institutions.

Hannah: Right. It’s called an MFA, but it’s not really an MFA––it’s more scholarly than artistic. You have to have eight years professional dance experience and an undergraduate degree even to qualify for the program so, artistic “training” isn’t really appropriate for the candidates. I formed the Chamber Dance Company in order to have the grads form a company that maintained a level of professionalism in which they could feel good dancing with peers and not go “cold turkey” on performing. Their tuition is paid and they receive stipends for being Teaching Assistants. The required coursework––when created––included a seminar in educational theory and a seminar in dance administration that focuses on creating a department, developing courses, chair responsibilities, tenure, how do universities run, etc. There was a research methods seminar, and they had to fill any giant undergraduate education gaps. One other course is often a delicate moment in the degree: “Teaching Methodologies” considers topics like anatomy, biomechanics and motor learning. It’s a way of suggesting different ways to approach the same aesthetic material––it’s part of the difference between master class teaching and long-term education. The focus is not just on being model artists but excellent teachers as well. All other credits were used in their independent course research to develop an academic course that they taught to the undergraduates in their last quarter. They are encouraged to come to faculty meetings and to not be naïve about any of the operations of the department. It’s a lot like a Masters in Education, but these artists needed a terminal degree, an MFA. They have the practical experience –– they bring the professional experience–– and mix it with the academic.

Another dimension (which I didn’t understand in the beginning but became a felicitous surprise) in creating the Chamber Dance Company, besides bringing a professionally produced and performed modern dance canon to the Seattle area, was that the grads were gaining broader performing experience in these seminal works. I was thinking the company was a gift to the undergrads and community, but it became an important history course for the grads––embodiment of the modern dance canon. Many of the candidates who come in have only been in one company and have little or no exposure to other movement and choreographic styles. We bring in these “stars” to restage the work allowing the grads to feel less alienated from the world they have come from and increase their range of experience. They are still interfacing in a really active way with the professional art world and some actually end up returning to professional dancing as a direct result of exposure to the artists we bring to campus to stage works.

Maura: What about the financial issues?

Hannah: Yeah, let’s talk about money. The question about rising tuition doesn’t affect the graduate program because is free. But, the budget slashing… We are now a faculty of five – with six faculty lines. We were advertising for an artist-in-residence and then got notice of our big cut and had to abandon that search and use that money in order to insure that the core curriculum of our major continued to be available.

Maura: Let’s talk about the major. How are you preparing your undergrads for a potential future in dance?

Hannah: It’s definitely a liberal arts degree—I’m deeply committed to that. We try to balance the intellectual with the performance, and we try to have our studio teaching be intellectually informed as well. We are trying to prepare our majors to be great citizens who dance. Their experience with the graduate students is very intimate, grads choreograph on the undergrads and they flock to those academic classes that the grads teach – which could be about women’s issues in dance or nutrition or advanced anatomy or aesthetics. Those courses are usually filled. There’s a symbiotic relationship, which really helps keep both degrees very lively. The undergrads get to see these incredible dancers performing. The grads need the undergrads for their creative work and they’re exposed to these smart, thinking minds that are beginning an intellectual journey as well.

Maura: How does your program relate to the Seattle community?

Hannah: Well, The Chamber Dance Company has about 1800 people who wouldn’t miss the show every year. At least half of them come from the city, so there is a great exchange there. Elizabeth Cooper has been great about outreach and teaching different places. Jennifer Salk takes undergrads to teach to underprivileged farming communities in Eastern Washington. Outreach is active. I created an archive of 85 of our dances that the public can have access to in terms of being able to view classics. But, when an artist comes to set a work– it’s really the money that dictates the options. Residencies tend to be fast and dirty. I try to have a brown bag lunch that’s open to the community and a couple master classes. The recent American Masterpieces funding has allowed us to host artists for longer periods and offer more activity, which is great.

Maura: How has the landscape changed in your time in academia?

Hannah: I have been thinking about one definite change. As I keep returning to the canon for our rep work, I’ve seen a change in the dancers’ ability to perform certain things. For instance, something that requires acting is not something that current aesthetic is training them in. This is a very general statement. The training or current aesthetic––flung, weighted, momentum and gesture based––has different technical and performative requirements than work of other periods. When we’re working on a Paul Taylor or Doris Humphrey dance, it’s a foreign language. I can’t say do a Paul Taylor run and have anyone know what that is. The training doesn’t seem to embrace as broad an aesthetic anymore––there is little “bound” movement in most training for example. I’m not saying it’s good or bad, but definitely a change.