First Chapter Draft: The Aftermath

I admit I’ve been extremely remiss in posting–my last post was over 2 months ago. But I did submit a full chapter draft to my chair about a month ago…and since then I’ve been living in the aftermath.

The original goal for that chapter submission was June 21, but I submitted it July 6 (Day 305!). Not bad, considering that I spent one of those interim weeks at an intensive dance studies seminar and Independence Day was in there, too. (A note about the Mellon Dance Studies Summer Seminar I attended: it is both terrifying and very productive to give a “research talk” about your dissertation project before a group of experts in a field you’re brand new to. I am happy to report that the seminar gave me a much better sense of what my larger contribution is and why people should–and do!–care about my DOS-D.)

My whole dissertation compressed into a single slide

My whole dissertation compressed into a single slide

With footnotes included, the final chapter draft was indeed 60 pages. But it was still a pretty rough draft–I knew before I even submitted it that I needed to do more archival viewing, and I definitely wish I had more access to some of the paper files that do exist but aren’t publicly available right now. In many ways, the chapter is a product of what was available. If I’m lucky, patience and perseverance will bring me into contact with more materials and this will help me to enhance the basic draft I completed.

Of course, it feels good to have simply produced a “complete” thing. It took me 9 months to gestate that baby, and while it felt like a really long time, I’m told that’s still pretty fast for one’s first chapter. I must admit I got impatient with myself toward the end, because it really did feel interminable to write on the same basic topic for over 50 pages. And of course, this also meant that I started to hate my argument–it felt repetitive and boring by that point, and every example felt the same as the rest, even as it would draw out new concerns and new patterns to be considered in the context of the rest of the evidence. I can already tell I’m not going to be one of those scholars who goes through and does one big edit at the end; every chapter is going to go through a few drafts before it’s ready to be integrated with the rest. There will probably be more drafts of this first chapter since I was still so new to the process when I was writing it, but I just can’t imagine being able to responsibly tie such a large ‘essay’ together without several months’ distance between it and myself, no matter how good I get at the chapter-writing process.

So here I am in the aftermath. What have I been doing with myself? Well, first I gave myself a week off where I didn’t have to think about my DOS-D at all. I watched some movies, did a lot of laundry, painted my nails (in other words, I took some Practical Lost Days and Mental Health Lost Days). Then, as a way to ease myself back into working, I considered the most obvious gaps that came up and decided to collect the data to address them, so I made a few visits to The Paley Center for Media and watched some more programs. I also revamped my personal website to serve as a stronger representation of my academic self. And then I fell ill.

I’m sure a lot of us experienced the post-finals colds and flus that often struck in college or early grad school; when one pushes one’s body to the limit, running on little more than adrenaline for the final push of a marathon, the come-down often involves a weakened and vulnerable immune system. So we get sick. Similarly, many colleagues told me about how sick they got after taking qualifying exams–I did, too–but I hadn’t considered that this would happen after the stress of completing a dissertation chapter, as well. There’s also the problem of age: I’m not a 20-year-old anymore, and my body can’t take being pushed as hard. Quals were really, really too much for me, and I paid for that push with over a month of poor health. I didn’t push myself that hard for the chapter, but still found myself on antibiotics for a week, so my lesson to myself for next time is: I need to ease into those final weeks a little better.

I think I’ve successfully kicked the illness, though, and I’m ready to start reading and archive trips for my next chapter–on The Nicholas Brothers! This means more visits to The Paley Center and reading Marshall & Jean Stearns’ lengthy Jazz Dance, potentially cover-to-cover. I’ve also just submitted a conference paper proposal related to my last chapter: it’s about the relationship between dance movement and film technology in Fred Astaire & Gene Kelly’s musicals. I’ll be exploring their partnerships with Hermes Pan and Stanley Donen, respectively, and conducting a close analysis of both the ways in which dancing for the camera affected their choreography and the ways in which their visions for what I call “impossible” dances required innovation and tricks on the cinematography/production side.

So that’s where I’m at–the tail end of the post-chapter-submission aftermath, getting back on the horse and moving forward. Of course, summer is also coming to a close and I’ll be back to teaching and other institutional responsibilities in about a month so I’ll have those to juggle, too. Hopefully the more structured time will mean more updates here rather than fewer. Until next time, readers!


Day 1: Greetings, Introductions, Beginnings

Hello Reader, and welcome to DOS-D.

This blog is in fact not about a heretofore unknown Disk Operating System from the ’90s, nor is it about the Department of Supernatural Defense–though you would perhaps have found those more interesting.  This blog is going to track my dissertation writing process, from its murky beginnings (now) to its very definitive end (a later time, in the future, at some point).  There will be videos and images, so that should be fun, and this should prove an interesting peek into the life of a young academic (especially for friends and family who remain a little mystified by my job description as a newly minted “PhD Candidate”).  There will also be a generous helping of my potentially crazy and probably contradictory thoughts as I try to process my research & writing–this will be less fun for you but hopefully helpful for me when I need to reflect on my choices.

Depending on how you came upon this blog, you may or may not know much about me and my project.  (Pretty sure there’s a widget or two in the righthand sidebar to help you out with the former).  In either case, you’ve no doubt gathered from the blog’s title that my work is concerned with dance on screen.  For the purposes of my dissertation, I am focusing specifically on the intersection of dance cultures with film and television cultures in the US during the middle decades of the 20th century.

A few weeks ago I successfully defended my dissertation prospectus, but my sage committee found it to be more like “a proposal for an entire career,” and suggested that I narrow down my focus.  So, after moving to a new city and attempting to clear my mind, I am launching into my first year of dissertation work in a confused state; I had a very clear plan before, but now I must reformulate it into something a little less ambitious, and I’m uncertain how I want this new version to look.

It’s a common adage in the humanities fields of academia that your dissertation is your plea for a tenure-track professorship (and thus has to be easily converted into an enticing first book manuscript), but I’ve also frequently been warned that I should be ready to “live with” my dissertation for at least a decade.  That is to say, between the research, the writing, the revising, the defending, the RE-revising, the book proposal, the job applications, the book manuscript, and the first several stand-alone courses taught, I’m going to be spending a whole lot of time with this topic for the next 10 years.  The prospectus I defended before my committee in September bore all this in mind; I worked on it for 4 months and felt confident, upon submission, that I could indeed live with that proposed baby for the next decade.  Now I have about a month to come up with a more streamlined, and thus more attractive, baby that I can love just as much.  And then I have 2-3 years to, uh, produce said baby.

So I sat down today and decided that I have no better way of figuring out the basic contours of my new DOS-D than launching myself into a few weeks of research.  I’ve gotta look at (some of) what there is–watch and re-watch old films and TV clips, read archival materials, re-visit key academic works on surrounding topics–in order to figure out how to structure what I have to say about it all.  I started with a clip of Gene Kelly being interviewed by Edward R. Murrow on a December 1958 episode of Person to Person, just days before Kelly’s Omnibus Christmas special “Dancing, A Man’s Game” aired on NBC.  A friend and colleague of mine recently happened upon a microfilm containing the transcript of the episode and generously sent it my way just this morning.

One thing that struck me about the interview was Kelly’s emphasis that the hardest part of the TV special for him was the fact of its TV-ness.  He says, while looking at his floorplans for the episode, “This is a new way to create dances for me because in this strange world of television–and it is strange to me having five or six cameras and one can’t get in the way of the other–but putting on a dance and talking about it is really the same thing.”  So, if we translate this into evidence of a mindset, Kelly is clearly used to working with a single camera for his Hollywood musicals (or none at all while on Broadway) and the only thing putting him at ease while juggling these many TV cameras is his professional knowledge of “putting on dances” because this knowledge, he supposes, will make it easy for him to talk his way through dance and present his argument that it’s not ‘sissy’ stuff, but “a man’s game.”

kelly person to person

A grainy copy of a copy of a copy of a copy of Kelly with his floorplans for “Dancing, A Man’s Game”

Then I decided to dive into some of the archival materials I’ve collected from eBay.  Several times during the 1950s and ’60s, Films in Review (the periodical released by The National Board of Review of Motion Pictures since 1950) cover images are stills from dance films, indicating that these films were found to be (at least visually) important at the time.  Reviews echoed Kelly’s concerns in the Person to Person interview in noting technological difficulties.  A 1956 review of Kelly’s Invitation to the Dance complains that, when Kelly dances with animated figures, the “difficult cinematic problems of trick photography and laboratory work…were not too smoothly solved” and that, as a result, “the combination of live and animated action is neither successful technically nor rewarding esthetically.”  A 1960 review of Can-Can makes immediate note that the “interesting things occur on the Todd-AO widescreen during the course of Can-Can‘s 120 minutes” (emphasis mine).


Dance, dance, dance!

Early drafts of my prospectus harped considerably on the role of dance in pushing the boundaries of technology, or highlighting recent innovations, or problematizing standard practices in film and television cultures.  By the final draft, this argument got watered down, and during my defense my committee and I focused almost exclusively on race and gender questions…..but I wonder if perhaps I should bring the technology angle back, if for no other reason than it certainly seemed to be a strong concern in dance on screen during the period in question.

Wellp, that concludes today’s thoughts.  Sorry this first post has been so long; now that introductions are out of the way, reading will probably be more manageable going forward.