Reviewed by:

• Marking Modern Movement: Dance and Gender in the Visual Imagery of the Weimar Republic by Susan Funkenstein
• Meagan K. Tripp

The first scholarly monograph to analyze images of dance during the Weimar Republic, Marking Modern Movement presents an art scholar's perspective on modernist social and stage dance while its crossdisciplinarity engages a broad academic audience. Susan Funkenstein examines a wide array of art works, periodical images, and archival materials to challenge longstanding notions of categorical objectification of the female dancing body without dismissing the complexities of gendered subjects. Her nuanced and intersectional look at gender concludes that dance was often, although not always, a liberating force. This study shows how careful attention [End Page 124] to a variety of images by men and women alike exposes the limits of dance for women as subjects, as well as the ways in which masculinity asserted itself within a female-centric dance culture.

The word marking in the title—a practice familiar to dancers and artists—"suggests a shared somatic practice of making" that centers the body much the way Funkenstein does throughout her monograph (9). The beautifully reproduced and adroitly interpreted forty-nine black and white and twenty-eight color images enrich the reader's experience and understanding, and the publisher's website contains quality digital copies of these images, which allow readers to appreciate details up close.

Six case studies of friendships between artists and dancers provide many specific examples within the frame of gender in Weimar dance depictions, yet Funkenstein also draws connections among the examples as intersections and tensions emerge. The case studies and the book as a whole draw upon the interdisciplinarity and multimediality now recognized as fundamental to modernist art and modernism as a whole.

Citing Kate Elswit's important work on Weimar dance, Funkenstein follows the trend in scholarship to examine concert dance alongside social dance without presumed cultural hierarchies. The study includes works from Berlin Dada, Expressionism, New Objectivity (Neue Sachlichkeit), and Bauhaus, although the movements are neither used as the driving principle of argumentation nor presented in neat one-to-one correspondence with dance of the time. Susan Manning's concept of "cross-viewing" (11) and Helmut Lethen's analysis of Weimar's "classification mania" (135) provide important frameworks for readings throughout the study.

The opening chapter presents Hannah Höch's early photomontages as examples of art works that challenge the premise that Weimar dance images all demonstrate a "radical potential to re-present women's subjecthood" (17). Dance history informs Funkenstein's rich analyses of collages that resist the common assumption of female dancers as symbolic of freedom and emancipation. In addition to demonstrating her own deep knowledge of dance history and imagery, Funkenstein makes the case that Höch possessed a robust knowledge of dance and the periodicals she mined for images. It thus appears purposeful that Höch incorporated images in line with conservative traditions in dance, fashion, and politics. The second chapter turns to Mary Wigman, arguably the most well-known dancer of Weimar Germany, to highlight how her understanding of female subjectivity influenced male artists' depictions of dancing bodies. The attention to whiteness, queerness, and class culminates in a nuanced examination of the ways in which Wigman and other artists broke down the subject–object dichotomy.

In her third and fourth chapters, Funkenstein turns to revue dance, introducing the third chapter by pushing against the dominant (male) readings of revue kicklines that frame female sexuality as mechanized, sexless, and not for other women. Examining periodicals and popular culture through a queer lens, the chapter emphasizes women's experiences of revues. Returning to Höch, Funkenstein argues that the revues were a place for female pleasure that could disrupt heteronormative ideals. The fourth chapter draws upon reviews, magazines, art works, ephemera, and autobiographical writings of Josephine Baker, the internationally renowned African American revue star, to demonstrate how Baker's dancing and images of her work both supported and contested stereotypes in...

审核人：

• 标记现代运动：魏玛共和国视觉意象中的舞蹈与性别作者 Susan Funkenstein
• 梅根·K·特里普

作为第一部分析魏玛共和国时期舞蹈形象的学术专着，Marking Modern Movement展示了一位艺术学者对现代主义社会和舞台舞蹈的看法，其跨学科性吸引了广泛的学术受众。苏珊芬肯斯坦审视了广泛的艺术作品、期刊图像和档案材料，以挑战长期以来对女性舞蹈身体分类客观化的概念，同时又不忽视性别主体的复杂性。她对性别的细致入微和交叉的看法得出结论，舞蹈通常是一种解放力量，尽管并非总是如此。这项研究表明如何仔细注意[完第 124 页]男性和女性的各种形象都揭示了女性舞蹈作为主体的局限性，以及男性气质在以女性为中心的舞蹈文化中的表现方式。

标题中的单词标记——舞者和艺术家熟悉的一种做法——“暗示了一种共同的身体制作实践”，这种做法就像芬肯斯坦在她的专着 (9) 中所做的那样以身体为中心。49幅黑白和28幅彩色图像的精美复制和巧妙诠释丰富了读者的体验和理解，出版商的网站包含这些图像的优质数字副本，让读者可以近距离欣赏细节。

六个艺术家和舞者之间友谊的案例研究在魏玛舞蹈描绘中的性别框架内提供了许多具体的例子，但芬肯斯坦也将这些例子之间的联系联系起来，因为交叉和紧张的出现。案例研究和整本书借鉴了现在被认为是现代主义艺术和整个现代主义的基础的跨学科性和多媒体性。

引用 Kate Elswit 在魏玛舞蹈方面的重要著作，Funkenstein 遵循学术趋势，在没有假定文化等级的情况下检查音乐会舞蹈和社交舞蹈。这项研究包括来自柏林达达、表现主义、新客观性（Neue Sachlichkeit）和包豪斯的作品，尽管这些动作既没有被用作论证的驱动原则，也没有与当时的舞蹈一一对应。Susan Manning 的“交叉观察”概念 (11) 和 Helmut Lethen 对 Weimar 的“分类狂热”的分析 (135) 为整个研究提供了重要的阅读框架。

开篇一章介绍了 Hannah Höch 早期的蒙太奇作为艺术作品的例子，这些作品挑战了魏玛舞蹈图像都展示了“重新呈现女性主体的激进潜力”（17）的前提。舞蹈史为芬肯斯坦对拼贴画的丰富分析提供了依据，这些拼贴画抵制了女性舞者作为自由和解放象征的普遍假设。除了展示她自己对舞蹈历史和图像的深入了解之外，Funkenstein 还证明 Höch 拥有丰富的舞蹈知识以及她为图像挖掘的期刊。因此，Höch 将图像与舞蹈、时尚和政治中的保守传统结合起来似乎是有目的的。第二章转向玛丽·威格曼，可以说是德国魏玛最著名的舞者，突出她对女性主体性的理解如何影响男性艺术家对舞蹈身体的描绘。对白人、酷儿和阶级的关注最终导致对威格曼和其他艺术家打破主客二分法的方式进行细致入微的考察。

在她的第三章和第四章中，芬肯斯坦转向讽刺舞蹈，通过反对将女性性行为描述为机械化、无性和不适合其他女性的滑稽剧踢脚线的主导（男性）解读来介绍第三章。本章通过酷儿视角审视期刊和流行文化，强调女性对喜剧的体验。回到 Höch，Funkenstein 认为讽刺剧是女性享乐的场所，可能会破坏异性恋规范的理想。第四章借鉴了国际知名的非裔美国喜剧明星约瑟芬·贝克的评论、杂志、艺术作品、蜉蝣和自传作品，展示了贝克的舞蹈和她的作品形象如何支持和挑战...