Writing Assignment #2: Difficult Passage

The Futility of Freedom

In André Lepecki’s article “Choreopolice and Choreopolitics,” Lepecki quotes Hannah Arendt’s unfinished book Introduction into Politics and uses her definitions to connect concepts of movement, the political, and freedom. When connecting the political with freedom, Lepecki writes, “for Arendt, neither freedom nor the political are a given; they are not anthropologically, historically, or genetically given to the human [ . . . ] freedom, is nowhere inscribed as that which defines, or centers, or founds humanity” (Lepecki 14). This passage supports Lepecki’s argument that unless members of marginalized communities continue to work towards gaining their freedom, they run the risk of losing it permanently. The choreopolicing of bodies and movement solidifies the state’s power and social control and also opposes an understanding of resistance and political movement through choreopolitics.

Because this freedom is never a given, choreopolitics must constantly be relearned and retaught to allow the oppressed to maintain freedom and combat choreopolicing. In her book, Arendt claims that “The meaning of politics is freedom” and “we do not know— at least not yet—how to move politically” (Lepecki 13). Using these definitions, Lepecki proposes the idea that moving politically and moving freely are one in the same and that because disadvantaged groups do not yet know how to move politically, they also do not yet know how to move freely. He coined two terms, choreopolice and choreopolitics, to establish a better understanding of how political and free movement is the same. Choreopolicing forces people into a sense of kinetic conformity that keeps people comfortable and maintains the illusion of movement, while in reality, their movement is entirely static. An example of choreopolicing is the use of “skateboard deterrents” on short flat walls. Although it seems as though this action is just to prevent damage, in reality, it is primarily a means to prevent homeless people from accessing comfortable places to sleep. Choreopolitics, on the other hand, requires the freedom of movement that choreopolicing tries so hard to limit. Choreopolitics has a person work to transform a space to better fit them, instead of being forced to conform to a space that does not fit them. Examples of choreopolitics in action are much more common in everyday life than one might think. Walkouts, moments of silence, and protests in the streets are all moments of people working to transform the world for their own better. These acts of resistance combat the conformity that choreopolicing demands.  

Protests such as the ACT UP Die-Ins during the AIDS epidemic demonstrate the clash between “political demonstrations as expressions of freedom, and police counter-moves as implementations of obedience” (Lepecki 16). During Die-Ins members of ACT UP would enter a public place, lie on the ground holding signs that resembled gravestones, and stay motionless even when police were tearing members away to be arrested. Through both action and stillness, the Die-Ins were carefully choreographed to spread awareness about the AIDS epidemic. The Die-Ins were a result of people’s frustration with the country’s inaction regarding the AIDS epidemic. In order to be free from this political stasis, something had to be done. However, the authoritarian reaction was completely disproportionate. All of ACT UP’s protests were non-violent, simply promoting awareness about the ongoing AIDS epidemic, but the violent arrests revealed homophobia at the core of AIDS denial. Police would go to these protests to disperse them while wearing gloves because they feared they may be contaminated through touch. The choreopolicing of these actions attempts to drown out the message that the protestors are trying to convey. They were no danger to the police; in fact, it was the government’s lack of response that was the true danger. Protestors attempted to use choreopolicing as a tool against the onlookers, as “They forced police, and those who watched to envision the body as helpless, as incapable of moving itself” (Foster 404). This example shows that choreopolicing is not just a tool used by oppressors; instead, choreopolicing and choreopolitics can overlap. When used in conjunction, both methods can be utilized toward freedom for the oppressed instead of only subjugation.

Similarly, movements such as #MeToo, Black Lives Matter, and reproductive rights all continue to enforce Arendt’s idea that freedom is not enshrined; it must continue to be fought for again and again. The #MeToo movement retaught gender equality previously championed by the feminist movement in the 1970s. The Black Lives Matter movement retaught lessons codified during the Civil Rights movement, but currently, school curriculums nationwide debate even basic racial equality lessons. Reproductive rights, thought to have been ensured fifty years ago because of Roe v. Wade, might fail to exist moving forward. These modern-day movements all share a link to past protests and reteach people how to move in a way that forces change. This cycle of reeducation about movement is what Lepecki means when he says, “whatever this moving accomplishes and brings into to the world at any given moment will be always provisional and incomplete. Thus the necessity to start again, to insist, no matter what, on the urgent challenge posed by that endless not yet” (Lepecki 26). As a nation, guaranteed rights start to fade away due to the State’s increasing choreopolicing of people’s movement. Officials treat peaceful protests by marginalized people with significantly more force than violent protests by privileged people. Ultimately, the State is less concerned with the movement than it is with the participants. 

When privileged people allow themselves to fall victim to choreopolicing, it is not necessarily that they conform, rather, it is often that they take on an apathetic view toward the lives of the disempowered. Choreopolitics causes change within the State only when those who benefit from the State’s choreopolicing begin to be moved by and align themselves with the choreopolitics of oppressed groups. Unfortunately, as Lepecki points out, human nature dictates that the movement’s achievements will only ever be temporary and unfinished. The fight for freedoms and human rights is a Sisyphean, but vital, challenge.

Works Cited

Foster, Susan Leigh. “Choreographies of Protest.” Theatre Journal, vol. 55, no. 3, Oct. 2003, pp. 395–412, https://doi.org/10.1353/tj.2003.0111. 

Lepecki, André. “Choreopolice and Choreopolitics: Or, the Task of the Dancer.” TDR/The Drama Review, vol. 57, no. 4, Dec. 2013, pp. 13–27, https://doi.org/10.1162/dram_a_00300.