60 Carving Out a Space in the words of a woman from Bontoc she interviewed in 1983 while doing her fieldwork. When Locsin asked the woman if she took offense at her choreography, the latter assured her that she was not bothered at all because Locsin’s dance never claimed to represent the “real” Igorot dance.8 No claim to authenticity was made. What was offensive to the woman were dancers who performed and claimed—perhaps implicitly—that they were Igorot, Bagobo, or Mandaya even if they were not. Locsin was relieved: “Her statement gave me encouragement and absolution as I have never claimed that my works were the ‘real thing’” (Locsin forthcoming, n.p.). Locsin’s title, “Igorot,” was a deliberate choice. Because of her limited knowledge of specific movements of each of the several northern ethnolinguistic groups (i.e., Bontoc, Ifugao, Benguet, and Kalinga Apayao),9 she decided to use the collective name “Igorot.” Although it was a practical choice for her, this decision could be read as a choreographic call that furthers the homogenization of distinct and complex cultures. Nonetheless, Locsin’s clear agenda must be considered. Mrs. Francisca Reyes depicted tribal and folk dances per se, meaning whatever she saw, she taught exactly. I create new movements. I just get inspiration from the tribal dances that I see or research on. As far as I know, I have my original steps. I know for a fact that I created the steps and did not lift them from anywhere else. But of course you cannot claim originality on anything because it is not strange for somebody to come up with probably similar steps from another place. That happens, but the compositions, the putting together, the embellishing of the movements are all mine (Dakudao “The Irrepressible, ” W1-W2). “Cultural ownership,” as Locsin implies will always be a problem. The very idea of ownership or authenticity has even been contested. Dance historian, critic, and teacher Roger Copeland comments that “everything is an authentic version of something, as in, ‘It’s not fake anything, it’s real plastic.’ Indeed, the only form of inauthenticity that many contemporary anthropologists will acknowledge is a nostalgia for the ‘purity’ of the past authenticity” (27). In choreographing her neo-ethnic pieces, she combines the old and the new and follows a logic in movement. As each step is characterized by an ‘energy flow,’ it leads to a next one, eventually creating phrases of movements that are logically connected (Locsin forthcoming, n.p.). In extending, elongating and creating variation movements, she does not lose sight of the source material or the “point of origin,” lest her re-creations become a mishmash of movements without integrity. The use of Western