that often get overlooked in the efforts to create national dance companies and the broad genre of “West African Dance.” The final chapter, “Dancing in Oakland and Beyond, 1977–1993,” is a hefty 104 pages, but it holds together well. There is growing interest in dance studies scholarship about the role of institutional structures in shaping dance, and Osumare provides a valuable account of the Every Body Dance Studio, which she takes over and transforms into the Everybody’s Cultural Arts Center (ECAC) in 1977. ECAC then evolves into CitiCentre Dance Theatre and eventually becomes part of the Malonga Casquelourd Center for the Arts. As a multidisciplinary, multiracial, community-oriented yet professional institution, ECAC highlighted what was unique about the Bay Area dance scene in the late 1970s and early 1980s. Osumare muses on the parallel between ECAC and the Clark Center for the Performing Arts in New York, the latter of which is more well-known today. After reading this account, I think ECAC should be considered in any study of twentieth-century US dance education or institutional structures. Osumare also spends 1977–1993 participating in major dance initiatives such as Dance Black America and American Dance Festival’s Black Tradition in American Modern Dance, as well as founding her own initiative, Black Choreographers Moving Toward the 21 Century. One of the biggest strengths of Dancing in Blackness, perhaps counter-intuitively, is that it is a memoir of someone who is not one of the big names in dance. As Osumare herself admits, her performing and choreographic career “never really made national waves” (326). What that opens up is a window into the living world of dance—how it happens on the ground in smaller pickup companies, dance studios, festivals, and administrative structures. The sense of the broadness of the dance world is fleshed out, as is its itinerant nature. Most dancers, like Osumare, are constantly on the move, constantly seeking new opportunities, often in new geographic locations. The breadth of black dance comes alive through Osumare’s narration. Furthermore, Osumare is the consummate model of the artist-scholar, and her life story offers an important lesson in what that designation means. Increasingly, people in the field are asked to be “artist-scholars” with the assumption that the person will play dual roles simultaneously and fully. Instead, Osumare transitioned through various phases, approaching her performing career with an intellect’s curiosity and her academic career with a dancer’s sensibility. Katherine Dunham, one of Osumare’s major influences, was also a scholarartist who recognized that this life must come in phases. It is no accident that Dunham’s major books were written and published when she was on hiatus from performing or teaching, even as she maintained the mindset of the artistscholar throughout. Allowing for shifts in foci, rather than expecting equal outputs in all arenas at the same time, leads to better creative and intellectual work. That point is perhaps a minor sidebar to the larger contributions of Dancing in Blackness, namely, how it expands the memoir genre, makes a strong argument for the importance of the West Coast in the development of mid-twentieth-century dance, and greatly expands our understanding of dance’s role in the Black Arts Movement. Furthermore, Osumare is an excellent writer who creates a smooth, jargon-free narrative flow while still making incisive and sophisticated theoretical points. Overall, the book is a tremendous resource for the field of dance studies’ big names.

中文翻译：

---

舞蹈狂：Kélina Gotman 的舞蹈与障碍。2018. 英国牛津：牛津大学出版社。381 页。23 插图。39.99 美元平装本。国际标准书号：9780190840426。

在创建国家舞蹈公司和广泛的“西非舞蹈”流派的努力中，这一点经常被忽视。最后一章“在奥克兰及其他地方跳舞，1977-1993”长达 104 页，但它很好地结合在一起。关于机构结构在塑造舞蹈中的作用的舞蹈研究奖学金越来越受到关注，Osumare 提供了对 Every Body Dance Studio 的宝贵说明，她于 1977 年接管并转变为每个人的文化艺术中心 (ECAC)。ECAC然后演变成 CitiCentre 舞蹈剧院，并最终成为 Malonga Casquelourd 艺术中心的一部分。作为一个多学科、多种族、以社区为导向的专业机构，ECAC 强调了 1970 年代末和 1980 年代初湾区舞蹈界的独特之处。Osumare 思考了 ECAC 与纽约克拉克表演艺术中心之间的平行关系，后者在今天更为人所知。读完这篇文章后，我认为在对 20 世纪美国舞蹈教育或制度结构的任何研究中都应该考虑 ECAC。Osumare 还在 1977 年至 1993 年期间参与了主要的舞蹈活动，如舞蹈黑人美国和美国舞蹈节的美国现代舞中的黑人传统，并创立了她自己的倡议，黑人编舞走向 21 世纪。在黑暗中跳舞的最大优势之一，也许与直觉相反，是它是一个不是舞蹈界知名人士的回忆录。正如 Osumare 自己承认的那样，她的表演和编舞生涯“从未真正掀起过全国的波澜”（326）。打开的是一扇了解舞蹈生活世界的窗口——它是如何在小型皮卡公司、舞蹈工作室、节日和行政机构中发生的。舞蹈世界的广阔感得到了充实，它的流动性也得到了充实。大多数舞者，比如 Osumare，都在不断地移动，不断地寻找新的机会，通常是在新的地理位置。通过 Osumare 的叙述，黑舞的广度变得生动起来。此外，Osumare 是这位艺术家学者的完美典范，她的生平故事提供了关于该名称含义的重要一课。该领域的人们越来越多地被要求成为“艺术家学者”，并假设该人将同时且充分地扮演双重角色。相反，奥苏马雷经历了不同的阶段，以理智的好奇心接近她的表演生涯，以舞者的感性接近她的学术生涯。凯瑟琳·邓纳姆 (Katherine Dunham) 是 Osumare 的主要影响者之一，她也是一位学者艺术家，她认识到此生必须分阶段进行。邓纳姆的主要著作是在她停止表演或教学时撰写和出版的，这并非偶然，尽管她始终保持着艺术家学者的心态。允许焦点转移，而不是期望在所有领域同时获得同等产出，可以带来更好的创造性和智力工作。这一点可能是对《黑暗中的舞蹈》更大贡献的一个次要侧边栏，即它如何扩展回忆录类型，有力地论证了西海岸在 20 世纪中叶舞蹈发展中的重要性，并极大地扩展了我们对舞蹈在黑人艺术运动中的作用的理解。此外，Osumare 是一位出色的作家，他创造了流畅、无行话的叙事流程，同时仍然提出了精辟而复杂的理论观点。总的来说，这本书对于舞蹈研究领域的知名人士来说是一个巨大的资源。