以前曾有个欧洲的圈内朋友跟我说，作为发展当代舞的生力军，在欧洲有两大重镇，一个是奥利地的维也纳，一个是英国的伦敦。加之英语信息的快捷与广泛，所有这些都助推我们加深对伦敦作为当代舞发展大本营的印象。今年的“跨艺”项目移师伦敦，本以为强大的“英国元素”会空前加强，但一段时日之后，却发现了相左的情况。
首先体现在参与者上。本届“跨艺”的东道主是伦敦，按说英国人的响应是更为积极踊跃的，但就目前项目中的三组成员（学者、编导、舞者）来看，英国人并不多。
先看编导组。本届“跨艺”从北京、台北、伦敦三地各邀请三位舞蹈编导加盟，北京出战的是郭磊、曾焕兴、赵梁；台北则有何晓梅、亦芬、苏威嘉；而伦敦选择的三位居然连一个英国人都没有，他们分别是德国人VERA、意大利人RICARDO和越南裔美籍的DAM。
再看学者组。伦敦方面，除了MARTIIN和REBECCA是英国本地人外，STAFENIE和ALEX是德国人，OLA是瑞典人，NAOMI是日本人，TED是美国人，策划人CHRIS则是加拿大人，就连英方的几位助手也难见英国人，倒是有一位名叫SANJOY的舞评人，我尚不知他是哪里出生的。
情况最好的当属舞者组。该项目上几届分别在北京和台北举行，舞者阵营几乎全部由中国大陆和台湾舞者组成，这次在伦敦举办，终于应该有英国的舞者加入了，然而数量也还是很有限，虽然有那么少数几位英国本地人，但其总体舞者构成的国际化背景也相当显著。
看了这样的情况，不禁让人疑惑：英国人有跳舞的吗？
舞蹈作为一个表达人类情感的艺术品种，在英国的追捧者肯定也是不乏其人的。虽然较之欧陆，英国的社会环境可以归入保守一类的，但追求艺术表达的火种应该跟世界各地一样不会轻易熄灭。英国有一个故事是关于一个男孩子学跳舞的，叫《比利·艾利特》，从电影到目前大红大紫的音乐剧都十分受欢迎。可见跳舞的话题尚是主流文化的焦点。我以前在美国时就碰到过许多在美国跳舞的英国舞者。
不过这个话题引起我兴趣的是超越英国人是否跳舞的问题，我感到兴趣的是，竟然会有那么多外国人在英国跳舞！这个现象正好证明了在我们学者热论时有英方学者提出的Cosmopolitanism概念。
讨论中首次提出Cosmopolitanism时，翻译按照汉语常规将其翻译成“都会”，因此我们汉语学者大都按这个思路去领会理解了，但很快思路便沿着Ruralism（城市化）的思路发展下去了。这显然与这个词提出的本意有差距，因为“世界主义”对应的是“民族主义”、“国家主义”，而“城市化”对应的是“乡镇化”、“乡土化”。最终，这个词终于落实到了汉语的“世界主义”上来，这样的思路就与原意的意图接近了。“世界主义”着眼的是“世界公民”的落脚点。
用这个词来描述伦敦可谓不谬。伦敦可谓是“世界主义”最名副其实的集中而十足的体现。这里汇聚着大量的“世界公民”，他们虽然各自有着自己的文化背景和成长经历，如今却都融在一个空间中生存。舞者的情况亦不例外，大量的各国舞者聚在伦敦，因为这里的开放观念和环境十分易于他们的个性表达。因而，这样的状态就形成了伦敦“世界主义”视角下的国际地位。想想这些舞者们，不是也与本届“跨艺”的Leaving Home, Being Elsewhere（离家，在别处）的主题相一致嘛。
英国参与跳舞的人或许不多，但这并不影响伦敦成为世界舞蹈发展的重要场所，这应该与伦敦的Cosmopolitan地位直接相关。当然，欧洲这种情形很普遍，只是伦敦较为突出一些而已。在这样一个“世界主义”的环境下，各种思想的交锋和交融更为突出，人们更为懂得欣赏和尊重别人的文化，而交流沟通时又用的是大家都听得懂的方法，如此，伦敦用它多元而丰富的Cosmopolitianism，为我们描绘出一幅人类和平相处共同发展的和谐图画。
Translation…
Jiang Dong’s London Reflections 06: Do the British dance?
A friend of mine, an insider in the European scene once told me, there are two key forces in the development of contemporary dance in Europe. One is Vienna, in Austria. The other is London. This testimony, combined with the fact that information in English is easy to access, furthered our impression of London as a kind of headquarters for the development of contemporary dance. With the arrival of this year’s ArtsCross in London, I imagined that the powerful “London Factor” would provide unprecedented impetus to the project. But after a period of time, I discovered that this was not exactly the case.
Firstly, let’s look at the participants. The host of this year’s ArtsCross was London, and one would have expected the response from Britain to be enthusiastic. However, the number of British participants among the three participating groups (academics, choreographers and dancers) was in fact very small.
Let’s take a look at the choreographers. The three regions participating in this year’s ArtsCross, Beijing, Taipei and London, each invited three dancers to join their delegation. Beijing brought Guo Lei, Zeng Huanxing and Zhao Liang; Taipei had Ho
And what about the academics? From the London side, with the exception of UK natives Martin and Rebecca, Stefanie and Alex were German, Ola was Swedish, Naomi was Japanese and Ted was American. The organiser Chris was in fact Canadian. Even among the UK assistants, it was hard to find one who was British. And then there was Sanjoy, one of the dance writers, whose origin I am unsure of.
London was better represented by Brits in the dancing category. When previous sessions of the ArtsCross project have been held in Beijing and Taipei, the
Seeing this, one finds it hard not to ask, do the British dance?
As an art form which represents human emotions, one would expect that dance would have its fair share of enthusiasts in England. Notwithstanding the fact that British society can be considered as relatively conservative when compared with the European continent, the spark of artistic impression is something that cannot be suppressed anywhere in the world. Indeed, the UK has a story about a boy who studies dance called Billy Elliott, which has been made into a musical and been very well received. It seems evident that dance remains a focus of mainstream culture. When I was in the US, I met many British dancers who were dancing in the US.
But this goes beyond the question of whether the British dance or not. What I am interested in is the fact that there are so many foreigners who dance in the UK! This phenomenon demonstrates the idea of Cosmopolitanism which the British scholars raised during our lively academic discussions.
When the concept of Cosmopolitanism was first raised in the discussions, the interpreter used the Chinese term “Metropolis”. As a consequence, most of the Chinese scholars understood the question from a different perspective, and the train of discussion soon turned towards a discussion of urbanisation. It was clear that there was a discrepancy of meaning between these words, since the opposing term for “cosmopolitanism” is “nationalism” or “statism”, and the opposing term for “urbanisation” is “ruralisation”.
In this end, the term was finally translated into the Chinese equivalent of “Cosmopolitanism”, and our train of thought was reconnected to the original meaning. The focus point for “cosmopolitanism” is the “Global Citizen.”
This was a highly appropriate term for London. London can be considered as a highly focussed manifestation of “Cosmopolitanism.” It brings together huge numbers of “Global Citizens” who, while possessing their own cultural backgrounds, are coming together in this one space. This is also the case for dancers. Dancers from across the world come together in London, largely because of the sense of openness and the ease with which they can express their own identities. As a result, London has developed a global reputation for having a cosmopolitan perspective. When I thought about these dancers, it occurred to me that there were strong parallels with the theme of this year’s ArtsCross: Leaving home, being elsewhere.
While the number of British dancers participating in the project was small, this had not prevented London from becoming an important international centre for the development of dance, and this is directly connected to London’s status as a Cosmopolitan city. Of course, this is very common in Europe. It is just that in London, the situation is a little more pronounced. In a cosmopolitan environment such as this, the merging and fusion of different ideas becomes even more pronounced. People become more able to appreciate and respect other people’s cultures, and in communicating, people use language which everyone can understand. In this way, London has used its strong sense of cosmopolitanism to create a blueprint for peaceful human coexistence and development.