keryx: (zil)
[personal profile] keryx
This is [livejournal.com profile] firecat's rant. Topic: mainstream bellydancers.

So. There's this thing that most of you who aren't in the bellydance "community" (such as it is) probably have never heard of, called the Bellydance Superstars (note - the website, it is ass). It's masterminded and produced by this one dude, who has taken lots of cool "underground" things (i.e. punk) and made them "mainstream" through marketing.

The dude's name is Miles Copeland, which I only know because no one will effing shut up about the dude and the shit he has to say. He's just some dude to me.

You seriously cannot go into some of the tribe.net communities without passing by yet another discussion of the BDSSes and how they may or may not be good for the dance as a whole. This isn't, by the way, because the show is dominated by the cheesier of the cabaret-style dance (though it is - but lots of dancers like that style) or because it's awfully darned exploitative (though there is a "hot chicks room" feel to it at times). No, people get cranky because a) they're starting to get into dancers on stilts and stuff like that and b) there's pretty much a No Fat Chicks policy in casting.

You'd think the No Fat Chicks thing would piss me off, wouldn't you? But see... that half-naked "hot chicks" thing kinda inherently comes with a No Fat Chicks policy in most things. What pisses me off is that there are always other dancers in these discussions who actually believe that it's not remotely exploitative (cause really, m.e. dance is about hot chicks, right?), period.

In actuality, it's probably not all that hotchicksy to go see the show, because very few non-dance-community people seem to even know about it. And dancers are generally vaguely feminist audience members. But if it really were as mainstream as people seem to think it is, it would be all about the hot chicks. Which might be okay (although not with me). It's still stooopid not to recognize that aspect of it, you know? That the show is all about this one dude's vision of what constitutes beauty both in women and their dancing. This really ought to push more dancers' feministy buttons.

The thing with the dancers on stilts? Is just laughable. I'm pretty sure it looks goofy, but if it doesn't - well, cool. It's not like belly dance is some sacred art form passed down in toto from our foremothers; it's a folk dance, one that changes with the folk. If you can make cool art while dancing suspended from a highwire riding a unicycle with a gaggle of geese, I say rock on.

Just don't make it about some dude and his band of beauties.

(no subject)

Date: 2005-01-28 02:32 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] keryx.livejournal.com
Although I will add, that if the other more obvious issue weren't there... I'd be pissed about the No Fat Chicks thing, too.

(no subject)

Date: 2005-01-28 02:46 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] snidegrrl.livejournal.com
But see... that half-naked "hot chicks" thing kinda inherently comes with a No Fat Chicks policy in most things.

GRR HEAD SPLODEY

(no subject)

Date: 2005-01-28 05:05 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] keryx.livejournal.com
Pretty much my reaction anytime this topic comes up for discussion. I actually had some dude give me a lecture about how I should see fat women as beautiful when I brought this up somewhere. I was like ARGH, you MORON, I AM a FAT CHICK, but that doesn't mean I want people to take this dance form as yet another way women are here to be consumed.

(no subject)

Date: 2005-01-28 02:47 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] wilfulcait.livejournal.com
I'll admit I always find it very funny when some American Tribal gal makes a remark about "maintaining the historical purity of our art" and how it has to be protected from ... the dancers on stilts, the fire eating dancers, the dancers with big dogs, whatever -- I want to look at them and say, honey, we just MADE THIS UP. This is MADE UP. This is "American Tribal" as in "MADE UP." What is this historical purity of which you speak?

(no subject)

Date: 2005-01-28 05:01 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] keryx.livejournal.com
The historical purity since 1982, obviously! Also, everyone needs to wear legwarmers and watch John Hughes movies. Things made after 1982 are bad!

Bwaaaahhahahhahhahaha.

(no subject)

Date: 2005-01-28 02:58 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] kazoogrrl.livejournal.com
*applauds*

Stilts? Really? I bet ding0 would swoon. I should dig the pair he made out of the basement and start practicing. I'll start me own BDNSSS (Belly Dance Not-So-Super Stars).

(no subject)

Date: 2005-01-29 10:03 am (UTC)
firecat: red panda, winking (Default)
From: [personal profile] firecat
Oh wheee! It looks like a bellydance clone of the "Lords of the Dance" genre of impossibly glitzy folk-art packaging.

There's never any Fat Chicks in any performance art designated for mainstream. [sigh]

It's not like belly dance is some sacred art form passed down in toto from our foremothers; it's a folk dance, one that changes with the folk.

Ahhhh, this suggests another rant to me - pagan fundamentalism. But it's been done.

Thanks!

September 2020

S M T W T F S
  12345
678 9101112
13141516171819
20212223242526
27282930   

Most Popular Tags

Style Credit

Expand Cut Tags

No cut tags