This text presents a new approach to the explanation of how to use Labanotation. In some cases, ideas that have traditionally been taught separately have been grouped together. In other cases, traditional terms have been abandoned in favor of terms that seemed more appropriate.

A lot of words that have become de facto terminology in the Labanotation community, have done so because they were the words used by earlier authors who were trying to explain their ideas to the readers of their works. Those earlier authors may have had the idea that they were defining terminology for a generation of notators; or they may have just been trying to explain their ideas using words that seemed appropriate. After all, it's useful to name something in a text, just so as to be able to refer to it later in the same text.

The current text also needs to refer to the ideas it contains; and not all of those ideas fit neatly under the names used for similar ideas by other writers.

Here is a brief example. Traditionally, Labanotation texts make reference to a 'simple staff' and an 'expanded staff', and these terms have become the standard way to refer to what appear to be two different types of staff. But if we consider the full description of the Labanotation staff in those texts, it becomes clear that the terms refer to just two of a much broader array of available staves, that are all simply variations of what I call the 'person staff'. The person staff has a number of characteristics that may be modified in different ways; one such way does look like what has been called the 'simple staff', while another does look like what has been called the 'expanded staff'. But there is simply no reason to name those two variants as distinct things. It seems clear to me that those terms were originally created as an expedient to get students into using the person staff quickly, without having to explain all the details and variable elements. A thorough examination of the Labanotation staff in the available literature produces a clear picture of how the person staff behaves, and how to modify it to produce various simpler and more expanded forms.

Here is another example that is slightly more involved. In Labanotation, a joint symbol may be modified to produce a limb symbol or an area symbol.

Fig. 1

The current text does not change the way those things are conceived. However, Labanotation traditionally recognizes another type of area symbol, that uses a rectangular construction to represent the area between two parts of the body.

Fig. 2

The similarity between this rectangular formation and the square formation in the diagram above it is clear: both have body part symbols enclosed in a box. And the rectangular formation has traditionally been called an area symbol in Labanotation because of this similarity. However, if we consider the possible uses of these symbols, a different picture emerges.

Fig. 3

From the above diagram it becomes clear that the way the rectangular formation is used bears a much closer resemblance to the limb than to the area symbol. For this reason, in the current text, I refer to the rectangular formation as a limb rather than an area. This distinction ends up influencing the way I organize the explanations of the various body part constructions, as well as my explanations of how gesture symbols should be applied to different body parts. Hopefully my way of grouping things together will make sense to the reader, and make Labanotation easier to understand.

Throughout the current text, I try to use terms that make sense to me, and that will make sense to anyone coming to Labanotation for the first time.

As a final point, I want to make it clear that Labanotation as described in this text behaves the same as Labanotation described in other texts. If you write a Labanotation score based on what is presented in this text, it will be readable by anyone who has learned Labanotation from other texts. The terminology we use to talk about Labanotation, thankfully, does not affect the actual behavior of the system. And that is why we are able to speak in new ways about the topic, without introducing errors or betraying the spirit of the subject matter.