Points scored for artistic merit

Dance is finally being recognised as an art form, but how long will choreographers have to wait before they can qualify as 'creative artists', asks Michael Seaver

Dance has cried wolf before. Long dubbed a "beleaguered art form" and "the Cinderella of the arts", it has bleated regularly about lack of money, lack of infrastructure and lack of respect. So when a letter appeared in this paper in February complaining of the lack of dance expertise on the newly appointed Culture Ireland committee, was it just more self-pity? After all, the visual arts aren't represented either, and dance's cultural standing has never been stronger.

"Yes, things have improved for dance," says the letter's author, Mary Brady, artistic director of the Institute for Choreography and Dance. "But it is still outside the door when it comes to decision-making. There has been dance representation on the past few arts councils, myself included, but there is still a sense in which the art form is kept under wraps and not seen as mature enough to stand on its own."

Several injustices have led to this victim status. Choreographers were not granted the tax-free status allowed to writers, visual artists and composers in the 1969 legislation, as they were not seen to produce "works of cultural merit". Dance was also not listed as an art form in the Arts Act of 1973, the year Joan Denise Moriarty established the first professional ballet company after more than 25 years' work. When Aosdána was formed in 1981, choreographers were excluded. Attempts to change that ineligibility, particularly by composer John Buckley in the early 1990s, were turned down on the grounds that dancers weren't creative artists - they merely interpreted music through movement.

While ignorance in government departments about the aesthetics of dance was grudgingly accepted, the idea that those supposed allies in the rarefied artistic world of Aosdána misunderstood choreography particularly irked the dance community.

With the inclusion of dance in the 2002 Arts Act a process of righting injustices began. Dance began nudging further into Aosdána's consciousness and earlier this year nominations were invited from choreographers (and architects). With 12 places vacant there was hope that the sole choreographer - one of the 23 applicants - might have their application accepted. It wasn't.

"The really important breakthrough this year is the fact that choreography and architecture are legitimised," says Aosdána registrar Paul Johnson. "Some of those who were accepted this year had applied before, so it may take some time [for choreographers and architects] to gain membership."

But the worry is that historical ignorance may continue to work against acceptance.

The issue of choreographer-as-author is one major obstacle to dance's full acceptance by official arts bodies. Dance has been likened to devised theatre, where the line between writer and performer is blurred. But although many choreographers work in a collaborative manner with their dancers, this does not negate their position as creators. All of the performing arts are collaborative: a script or musical score is an invitation to perform. Composers rely on the collaboration of musicians to perform their scores, and some choreographers operate identically.

Michael Klien, artistic director of Daghdha Dance Company, produces dance "scores", similar to those of composers, that are a series of movement instructions. Although they are distributed freely on the internet, he maintains authorship and copyright.

"I like the idea of the open community on the web, so I have a slightly more humane attitude to performing rights with these particular pieces," he says. "I ask that anyone who performs the work credits me as the choreographer, and in some cases I have a bad-quality sound file on the net with a better-quality one available only if they contact me. I can then screen the performers to a certain extent and maintain some control."

In Klien's contract with Daghdha there are far stricter rules about performing rights, and although he works in a highly collaborative manner with Daghdha's dancers (or "dance artists" as he prefers to call them), there is no doubt that he is the author of the work.

"Daghdha is the only dance company in Ireland that has had a turnover of artistic directors and isn't run by a founder artistic director," he says. "My contract states that the company can perform my work for three years without my permission when I leave, although I did include a clause that allows some quality control over dancers etcetera."

Klien is aware of the issue of copyright from his time working with William Forsythe in Frankfurt.

"When he parted from Frankfurt Ballet there was a dispute over whether he or the company owned the choreography," Klien says. "He won out in the end. They might own the sets, but he owns the choreography, and that's an important distinction. Companies can buy the right to a creative skill, but not the skill itself. I also think it's important as a choreographer to know you can leave a company with a portfolio of work and not have to start again from scratch."

The more extreme example of the Martha Graham Company in the US was a wake-up call to many choreographers to be more careful in the contractual conditions attached to their work. In a protracted battle, which led to the closure of the company and school, it was argued that Martha Graham, who had died in 1991, was an employee of the Martha Graham Company and didn't own the performing rights she passed on to her heir, Ron Protas.

The Martha Graham situation is typical in the world of dance. A choreographer begins producing his or her own work as a sole trader, but, with more success, has to form a limited company with a board of directors. They then become an employee of the company and relinquish control to the board, and it is at this stage that legal issues of ownership of work must be copper-fastened.

Against this legal backdrop, whereby choreography can be copyrighted and lawyers argue over the rights of ownership, it is difficult to reconcile parochial debates about whether a choreographer is really a creative artist or whether a work of choreography is a "work of artistic merit", a prerequisite for tax-free status.

The review of the Artists' Exemption Scheme by the Department of Finance in consultation with the Revenue Commissioners is underway and is expected to be complete by the end of the year. A public consultation process, which is seeking submissions on any relief or exemptions from all interested individuals or bodies, is ongoing and a spokesperson for the Arts Council has said that they are "talking about the whole artists' exemption scheme now and we will consider the status of choreographers at the earliest possible opportunity".

But the Arts Council has had the opportunity to make the case for choreographers before now. It has ongoing contact with the Revenue Commissioners in relation to the scheme, and was involved in the review in 1994 that drew up the guidelines that operate at present. It has always treated the issues sequentially: get dance listed in the Arts Act and gain membership of Aosdána, and tax-free status would follow.

In the light of the recent Aosdána developments, energies are now focused on the tax revision. Positive outcomes in these areas will improve dance's general cultural standing and, hopefully, lessen oversights in appointments to decision-making committees such as Culture Ireland.

Constant lobbying is imperative for all the arts, but now, with one final push, there's a chance for Cinderella to finally go to the ball.