on monday, i attended the first of a set of talks with contemporary Indigenous choreographers. the list of choreographers, which includes both pioneers in the field of contemporary Indigenous dance here in taiwan and a few young artists, promises discussions that challenge and expand how we think about Indigenous dance today. whether these discussions happen, however, may depend on curatorial framing–the right kind of push against audience perceptions of Indigenous art (and by extension Indigenous people)

sadly, in this first talk curatorial framing reinforced tired stereotypes, leading me to ask:

really? in 2022?

上禮拜一我參加了某劇院原住民舞蹈座談會系列的第一場活動，系列受邀編舞者包括當代原住民舞蹈老前輩以及年輕一代的新人，所以我有一種興奮的心情來參加，期望座談會挑戰並放寬一般民眾對於原住民舞蹈的定義以及想法，但是座談能有效果否，其實要看策展人如何導讀，如何讓聽眾重新思考他們對原住民藝術（和族人）的「認知」

策展人需要將聽眾對原住民的期望推到一邊才行， 但可惜的是，這一場策展架構其實加強了刻板印象，使得我嘆息得說

真的要這樣嗎？已經民國幾年了呃

i began to worry when the curator expended an incredible amount of energy to establish their credentials–they participated in a late 1970s salvage ethnography project to document “traditional dances of taiwanese natives.” their conclusion from interaction with Indigenous dancers and choreographers: “so natural!” “they dance soooo well!” “dance is in their DNA!”

策展人費了很多時間來認定他為什麼可以導讀原住民舞蹈，讓我開始懷疑

他參加1970年代末「搶救」消失中的「台灣土著」傳統舞蹈的研究計畫，從此也推廣傳統舞蹈 （不管舞步是別人的祭典，在今日多元文化的台灣已經是每一個台灣人都可以用），幾十年觀察、跟原住民舞蹈家互動的結論是：「他們舞步很自然！」、「跳得好厲害！」、「舞蹈在他們的基因中！」

there is a kind of praise that harms, a kind of appreciation that marginalizes. i don’t think that the curator is a bad person; rather, it is their goodness–their appreciation–that renders Indigenous people objects for settler consumption and Indigenous dance a means for settlers to avoid thinking of decolonization as anything but a kind of cultural inclusion

we feel good now, so we don’t have to return the land, right? we good?

我並不覺得策展人有種族歧視，至少當他欣賞原住民舞蹈，他有一篇誠心，但問題就在於他如此「友善」的心態。有一種欣賞會將人邊緣化，誇張的讚美成為一種傷害，「他們跳得好厲害！」就像一把小刀微侵略「他們」，我們可以說策展人的誠心讚賞其實將原住民變為墾殖者（即華人，台灣主流社會）可以消費的客體，將原住民舞蹈成為墾殖者避免重新思考解殖民，讓主流社會陶醉在多元文化而不用面對解殖民的話題

大家都很開心，所以不用還土地，不是嗎？我們都是一家人吧！

the problem of framing became most evident, however, with the performance that followed a dialogue with a distinguished choreographer. the work of this choreographer and his troupe paved the way for many later Indigenous artists. and not just in the field of dance–the troupe was part of the formation of several musicians, writers, and performance and visual artists, demonstrating the importance of dance as an aesthetic form and a type of historical memory among Indigenous people. however, the troupe does belong to an earlier period of Indigenous cultural production in taiwan, one in which Indigenous artists attempted to rediscover traditional dance and bring it to the stage. today, most Indigenous choreographers would feel uneasy with taking traditional, particularly ritual, dances outside of their contexts in ritual in specific Indigenous communities; moreover, today’s Indigenous choreographers seek not to represent tradition more than they desire to employ modes of thinking and movement from a wide set of domains (including dance by also weaving, net construction, and hunting) to create new pieces which often do not look like “Indigenous dance.” placing the work of the distinguished choreographer in its historical context might have given a better framework for the audience

策展架構問題最明顯的時刻可能是座談後的小表演

受邀編舞者是位貢獻巨大的老前輩，他1980年代進入舞蹈研究以及表演，並組織一個影響力頗大的舞團，此舞團對日後原住民文化工作的影響，不管是舞蹈、音樂、劇場、寫作、表演和視覺藝術，都無法否認，是培養很多舞者、歌手、藝術家，這樣也證明了舞蹈在原住民審美觀及歷史記憶的重要性。然而，這老前輩和舞團的時代背景跟當代原住民文化工作者脈絡不同，當時老前輩希望可以透過舞蹈採集、保存傳統舞蹈，並加以整理在都會的戲台上呈現，他們採集的舞步經常屬於祭典舞曲的原因，不只是因為祭典舞曲之美，更重要是祭典舞曲扮演的文化、歷史記憶的角色，而且1980-1990代很多部落已經換用卡帶跳觀光商品化的「大會舞」，引起當時原住民文化工作者的一種文化危機感，因此「傳統」、「祭典」變成當時的創作目標。但2022年，年輕一代的編舞者卻不太會引用祭典舞曲： 文化政策脈絡已經將祭典舞曲定義為某一個部落的文化財產，不可以輕易引用以避免被罵挪用，如果是自己部落的祭典舞曲，從祭典的脈絡拉到戲台上呈現更讓人感覺不安；反正年輕一代對「創作」的想法不同，他們試著在部落各種生活實踐（比如編制、打獵等）的思維和動作尋找線索，構造獨特的肢體語言，創作出新作品，而這些作品跟一般民眾對原住民舞蹈的想像，明顯不同。

針對老前輩的方式，觀眾若了解歷史脈絡（及其變遷）可能比較好吸收編舞者要傳達的訊息

this problem is important because in the presentation of ritual dance, the choreographer chose to show the annual ritual (ilisin) of makota’ay, a pangcah community on the northern bank of the siuguluan river. makota’ay’s illisin dances highlight the youth and vitality of the community’s men; it is both a ritual offering and a show of might. every three years, the ritual includes the promotion of a new age set to the role of mama no kapah, an age grade that administers community affairs. in this section of the ritual, soon-to-be-promoted men must drink a large bowl of rice liquor, which represents their capacity to take on the work

脈絡問題很重要，特別是因為編舞者選擇makota’ay部落年祭（ilisin) 的祭典舞曲當他的曲目。makota’ay的舞步表現部落男人年輕、活力的身體，舞步是奉獻給祖靈的祭品也是訓練年輕人的演習，每三年年齡階層晉升時，即將成為mama no kapah階級的男人要接受耆老的訓話，mama no kapah每一個成員要暢飲一大碗米酒，象徵他有能力擔當治理部落大任務，編舞者因年齡階層在阿美族文化的重要性，而決定把mama no kapah 大口喝米酒的動作，跟舞步一起呈現在戲台上…

upon seeing the scene of Indigenous drinking, the settler audience shouted and applauded loudly

i sank in my seat, feeling my face burn. it was difficult not to feel shame. here we go again: the audience will leave thinking, “just as we thought, those mountain people are carefree, dancing all the time. and they love to drink!”

雖然前面的物資值得大家欣賞，觀眾一直保持適合文化殿堂的沈默，只是一看到原住民在喝酒…觀眾大聲歡呼，一直拍手

我想消失，臉紅了，感到被羞辱

又來了，觀眾就可以補充刻板印象，當他們離開可想，「我們知道了，山地人真可愛，樂天無慮，天天跳舞，都愛喝酒！」

is this really what we want to communicate in 2022?

我們2022年真的想要這樣？是我們要傳達的訊息嗎？

although one might attribute this reaction to the prejudices of the settler audience, i cannot help but to think that the problem lies in curation. how might we create conditions for settler audiences to confront their prejudices rather than confirm them, particularly in the realm of Indigenous dance performance?

你可能會說，這種反應來自觀眾的偏見與歧視，不過我想，我無法不想，這個問題是策展過程所引起的，策展可以提供另外一種架構讓觀眾接觸到原住民舞蹈，所以我想問：我們要如何建構一個環境，使得觀眾面對他們的偏見與歧視？原住民族舞蹈表演的領域有這種可能嗎？