Thread: Staleness - how to avoid? What about gimmicks?

Two entirely different threads came together in my mind.

On one thread, we're reassuring Stardancer that repetition is okay, that it's possible to deliver fabulous performances based on a limited movement vocabulary. On another thread we're criticizing the Bellydance Superstars for being stale.

So how do we reconcile those two seemingly contradictory ideas?

I've thought about it, and I have a hypothesis. I'd be interested in seeing what others think, too.

In thinking about the "stale" elements of the BDSS show, I realize that everything I listed was a gimmick. Bellynesian. Latin fusion (samba et al). Dancing on a drum. Multiple veils. Issam's "clap out the rhythm" shtick. All of these are gimmicks, not the core of belly dance.

I also noticed that I didn't complain about any of the Tribal Fusion pieces, nor did I complain about the Oriental solos by Jillina. Why? I'm thinking it's because these weren't gimmicky. They were just plain good dancing. And I'm always happy to see more good dancing minus the gimmicks.

I'm sure that the purpose of the gimmicks is to introduce variety into a 2-hour show. Variety can be good. And considering the general-public aspirations of the BDSS, I can understand the desire to use such techniques to hold the attention of people who don't "get" Oum Kalsoum. But the problem with gimmicks is that they call attention to themselves, and the dancing becomes secondary. When you see the same gimmicks repeated multiple times by the same dancers, they lose their freshness and become tedious.

Thoughts? Comments?

i think you hit it on the head (for me anyways). i can't stand watching gimmicks! i was given a copy of the bdss folies begere dvd and i've flipped through it once; however, all of my orientale dvd's are in heavy rotation because i just can't seem to get enough of them. every time i catch at extra little move that i didn't before is so exciting!

it seems like sometimes our audiences are taken for granted, that we (as in a dancer) think that they need an over the top show to understand belly dance. if a dancer is good, she is the interpretation for the music and her movement is what translates that message; whether it be hakim or Oum K.

in regards to the repetition note, there's so many different things you can do with 1 movement. you can make it bigger, small, faster, slower, travel with it, move it to a different part of your body, go forwards to backwards, put it on an angle or take it to a diagonal. repetition is the basis of this dance; those who really understand that have the biggest trick up their sleeve!

Not to compare myself to the BDSSes and perhaps taking a tangent, but the troupe I was in 15 years ago always did the same routines. They were fabulous and we were always together. But, YAWN! The director didn't think anything of it, she compared us to a Broadway show that rans for years and years and yet people kept seeing it.

With regards to a show, I think it's great to have a signature troupe dance that you can really cut loose and enjoy, but things have GOT to stay fresh. Rotate old routines with new ones. Limit the prop use (how about 16 different sword dancers?). Bring in guest dancers. Keep a time limit!

And personally, I try to always change up my music. I try to learn new props as they pop up, just so I can use them, but I limit how often I perform with them. Also, I have found that new props help me in other ways. Fan veils really loosened up my arms, for example.

Great thread! I can't wait to read more!

Originally Posted by SandraDances

The director didn't think anything of it, she compared us to a Broadway show that rans for years and years and yet people kept seeing it.

Great thread! I can't wait to read more!

that's a great comparison. one of the biggest challenges for a long running stage show, featuring the same performers for long periods of time, is keeping the energy and dynamic stage presence equally high in the first week of the run as it is in in the 600th week of the run.

it is very hard to play the same character or perform the same dance exactly the same way, hundreds of times and still give a fresh inspiring performance. and after a while, "happy to be here" may not cut it as motivation for the performer.

people laugh at the "what's my motivation" acting thing, but its very valid. if we are scripted or choreographed to the teeth, i think we must find our own subtle nuances of expressive interpretation to keep it fresh "from the inside out".

so i guess i'm saying the freshness comes from the mind of the performer and is expressed in variations of stage presence. does that make sense?

and yes, great thread

Looking back on Raqs B show. I enjoyed very little of it but there was one shining star:Bozenka.
What tricks did she have up her lovely gaunlet?some bl**dy good belly dancing.
What props did she use? None unless you count talent and personality.
I rest my case.

Originally Posted by *Shira*

I'm sure that the purpose of the gimmicks is to introduce variety into a 2-hour show. Variety can be good. And considering the general-public aspirations of the BDSS, I can understand the desire to use such techniques to hold the attention of people who don't "get" Oum Kalsoum. But the problem with gimmicks is that they call attention to themselves, and the dancing becomes secondary. When you see the same gimmicks repeated multiple times by the same dancers, they lose their freshness and become tedious.

RE: gimmicks calling attention to themselves:

I wonder if the GP thinks the things we dancers think of as gimmicks are gimmicks?

Deborah

Repetition and freshness are two sides of the same coin for me with regard to the dance (gimmicks are a different thing). If you dance to the same song for a couple of years, you get really comfortable with it - you can experiment with structured improvisation in it, depart from it, go back to it, do it with stick or not, or veil, or wings. I'm not saying only dance to one song, but when the chips are down, it's nice to have a song that you consider a "friend" to turn to.

I think it is indeed the gimmicks that make things seem repetitive. I think with BDSS, they don't explore other elements. I feel like a lot of the music and ideas are the same. The problem with a lot of the gimmicks is they're confining. I'm not sure how Issam could change that clapping thing. Something like a hip drop or shimmy can be used in a myriad of ways. Changing the speed, angle, music, and dancer's expression, not to mention layering, can make the move special and interesting.

Although I'm not sure if this is true, I wonder if BDSS get boxed into doing some of the gimmicks. I always wondered if Petite Jamilla had to do the x number of veils or the Rachel Brice backbend thing (I remember a period where I could bet my paycheck she'd do it), because people wanted to see it.

The vocabulary of dance is fine, it's how it's used can seem stale.

A few years ago I remember there was a similar discussion on here, and a few Bhuzzers pointed out that they'd be so disappointed if they went to see Dancer X and she didn't do her Thing. I think it was raised with particular reference to Fahtiem's sideways belly roll. I think the difference, though, is how and where it's used. Not the same dance, not the same music, not the same thing every single time.

I could be wrong here, but aren't most of the BDSS pieces on DVD? If you can watch them over and over on the DVD, they get that much more unexciting live, eventually, I guess.

Personally, my beef with BDSS is that they haven't deviated from their "dance sampler" style of show. The gimmicks are fine, even if they don't always (or even usually) tickle my fancy as tossing in an element for novelty's sake can increase excitement. But what I'd really like to see is something with a storyline or a purpose, essentially a backbone to the show as opposed to BDSS's usual "here's a drum solo. Here's a veil routine. Here's Novelty X fusion. Here's Novelty Y fusion." A common thread running through the whole thing that ties the dancers and their dance together in some sort of logical format (again, some sort of storyline, regardless of how abstract it is) would be very welcome. That is how Riverdance is formatted, that is how Cirque du Soleil constructs their shows, and it makes for an interesting and dynamic show overall.

I saw the BDSS when they were here in Detroit last year, and I wrote a long review/reply to Miles. I felt the same as you Shira and I expressed to Miles that I really wanted to see just some plain old good belly dancing. No matter how good your group is you are limited in your interpretation of the music. I kind of hate to see how belly dancing is being broken down and formatted like other dance forms. I used to love to go watch the dancers in my area because we all had our own unique style. Not one of us danced like someone else. Now, all too often I see dancers from all over the world dancing so very similar.

However, all that being said, I think the GP like to see the gimmicky stuff. They always seem to be more impressed with the coin rolling and the sword balancing versus a quiet interpretation of Oum Khoulsoum.

So I think in order to be a balanced dancer you need to have honed dancing skills but you still need a few gimmicks up your sleeve. I worked as a house dancer in several clubs for several years. When you are dancing that long at a place you have to keep reinventing yourself or you become stale.

So I would constantly update my costumes, create my own steps, convince the band to change up my music, change props, change the color of my hair even. Sometimes when I felt myself starting to go stale, I'd take a break for a couple of months then come back with something totally new. That's one thing I really admire about Madonna - her ability to change herself over. That's a smart entertainer.

Totally agree that BDSS is just too formulaic (is that a word?). The show feels stale because to my UK eyes it is - the same format is repeated (especially over here) time and time again and gimmicks won't help make things more exciting if you've seen them a dozen times before. The problem with gimmicks is that if you rely on them and only on them for variation and excitement within a show how do you up the ante? There is a point where the audience is left feeling 'ok that was clever but so what?' Or at best they expect the next gimmick to be even more clever and what if you can't top what you are already doing? How does Petite Jamilla make double veil more 'exciting' - 4 veils, 6 veils, 10 veils where does it stop?

The difficulty is that within the BDSS show I can't even appreciate the bits which are just about plain old good dancing because by that point the format of the show and constant gimmicks have made me switch off.

Also I never get bored by good dancing presented well, where you feel that the dancer/performer is really giving something to the audience and expressing the music and themselves through their movement. Dance for me comes from the heart and when I see that in a performer I could watch him/her for ever. That's my other beef with BDSS that makes it stale for me. I see sleek, professional, competent, pretty performances but I don't see much heart!

I think we need to distinguish between the reasons different people attend different kinds of dance shows. Beware - for the purposes of argument, there are some sweeping generalisations ahead

Most of us posting here are practicing dancers in some shape or form (including those going to class and those performing professionally). I think we have to accept that this definitely gives us a different perspective on the dances that we watch: we can be more technically interested in what a dancer is trying to do, we can often be more open to the emotional content of a dance, and we are much more critical of what we see presented. I think that this gives the 'plain old belly dance' more value to us - we know what we're looking at.

Many people go to dance shows (of any genre of dance) to be entertained, rather than as part of a connoisseurship of a particular dance style. Accepting that different people are entertained by different things, a lot of audiences are looking for the 'clap along' and prop-wielding stuff. What we think of as gimmicks help people connect with a dance that they otherwise don't 'get' - via visual spectacle.

Example: A few months ago my partner and I attended a local bellydance show. I was fascinated with the choreography, technique, interpretation and stage presence of all the dances/dancers. He said that his favourites were the sword and the Isis wings because they 'looked so different', and also told me that 'all that traditional stuff gets boring after a while because I don't understand what's going on'. No criticism of the dancers - but a pretty honest explanation of what he felt he could connect with and why.

Of course, those are sweeping generalisations and there will be dancers who are blown away by the spectacle, and non-dancers who will connect emotionally and technically.

So, I think we can handle the apparent contradiction. We can encourage stardancer to explore the myriad ways of expressing the 'limited' movement vocabulary and produce fabulous performances AND we can accept that props and gimmicks are good ways to draw in audiences who are less interested in nuance.

That turned out to be a lot longer than I thought it would...now I have to go and do some work!

The way I see it, BDSS continues to try to market itself to the mainstream with funky gimmicks, exciting props, etc etc. But unfortunately for BDSS, its adiences are not the mainstream GP, but belly dancers.

If BDSS was being watched by average GP, or even BDers with limited access to professional dance shows, the audiences would probably be really happy and excited with what they see. But because, so far as I can glean, the audiences are mostly belly dancers and repeat audiences at that, they get critical and bored.

Originally Posted by zumarrad

The way I see it, BDSS continues to try to market itself to the mainstream with funky gimmicks, exciting props, etc etc. But unfortunately for BDSS, its adiences are not the mainstream GP, but belly dancers.

If BDSS was being watched by average GP, or even BDers with limited access to professional dance shows, the audiences would probably be really happy and excited with what they see. But because, so far as I can glean, the audiences are mostly belly dancers and repeat audiences at that, they get critical and bored.

When the tours first came here, I remember making this point to MC here on Bhuz and Tribe. Ah no he was aiming for the GP and yes the GP will like the gimmicky bits best but hey ho, how many GPers are we seeing at the shows and Raqs B is aimed at the attendees of the whole weekend.who the belly dancers?
And there was so much griping about the Raqs B show, I do hope the penny has dropped.Here in the UK, BDSS shows are attended by bellydancers, Miles...and you need to please them and forget having more than a handful of the GP.
It may be too late as I hear everywhere dancers and keen long term dancers prepared to spend their cash saying "Not bothering again..it's the same old show" or "what I want to see is just plain good belly-dancing, more folkloric, er men , less showgirl etc etc"
To many of us what matters is talent and skill reflecting the heritage and culture behind this dance as well as its' evolution.

Is there any way to appeal to both the GP and dancers? I don't see why Miles has to keep the ideas separate.

Is there any way to *attract* the GP consistently?

What did Riverdance have that BDSS doesn't?

I've seen ads on TV for Riverdance and I believe in some travel magazines. Does that make a big difference? Even though Miles is supposedly a big manager, I do wonder if he's actively exploited all the PR angles. Cirque du Soleil and the Blueman Group seem to do well.

Originally Posted by zumarrad

What did Riverdance have that BDSS doesn't?

Storyline, continuity, a clear purposeful beginning and end. It gives the GP something to "go off of," so to speak - if they don't necessarily get the nuances of what they're watching, there's some sort of continuity and context to place it in. A hard story isn't necessary, but there needs to be something tying all the threads together. It also helps build the show to a satisfying climactic point, something in which I feel BDSS seriously lacks (their "climax" moments seem to rely primarily on the gimmics).

Originally Posted by halftruths

Personally, my beef with BDSS is that they haven't deviated from their "dance sampler" style of show. The gimmicks are fine, even if they don't always (or even usually) tickle my fancy as tossing in an element for novelty's sake can increase excitement. But what I'd really like to see is something with a storyline or a purpose, essentially a backbone to the show as opposed to BDSS's usual "here's a drum solo. Here's a veil routine. Here's Novelty X fusion. Here's Novelty Y fusion." A common thread running through the whole thing that ties the dancers and their dance together in some sort of logical format (again, some sort of storyline, regardless of how abstract it is) would be very welcome. That is how Riverdance is formatted, that is how Cirque du Soleil constructs their shows, and it makes for an interesting and dynamic show overall.

They seemed to be almost on the narrative track with the opening of their last show but they didn't keep the idea going all the way through. I had the same thought as you, some sort of storyline that makes you go away from the show thinking, would take them up an artistic level, imho.

Zumarrad asked - what does Riverdance have that BDSS doesn't?

IMHO, I think that Riverdance goes along with the wave of popularity that all things Celtic have been enjoying for the last few years. Many people, at least in the US, identify themselves as having Irish roots and Riverdance plays into the fantasy that we have about our ancestors and to some extent, ourselves.

Regarding Issam's clapping thing: watching the Folies Bergeres DVD what struck me the most about his spiel was how long it took most of the audience to catch on and actually clap out 1 2 3!!! lol!

Carpediem, I was wondering about that. ME-background American people don't need to be fed dance-related fantasies about themselves because they already set up their own clubs and traditions in the 50s and they have particular ideas. Not to mention, it's something some might still do at home themselves, whereas Irish diaspora people don't, so far as I can tell, grow up doing Irish dancing unless they have lessons. Newer migrants are close enough to home not to need elaborate theatrical fantasies.

Also, I'd just about lay money the Irish diaspora is way bigger than the ME one, internationally. For we are Legion.

Originally Posted by zumarrad

Also, I'd just about lay money the Irish diaspora is way bigger than the ME one, internationally. For we are Legion.

..l;,

I agree through - when I saw Riverdance, it was with 3 other friends of Irish heritage, and we were definately looking to connect with our Irish roots by seeing the show.

Originally Posted by zumarrad

ME-background American people don't need to be fed dance-related fantasies about themselves because they already set up their own clubs and traditions in the 50s and they have particular ideas. Not to mention, it's something some might still do at home themselves, whereas Irish diaspora people don't, so far as I can tell, grow up doing Irish dancing unless they have lessons. Newer migrants are close enough to home not to need elaborate theatrical fantasies.

Although I see your point, I'm not sure I can agree. Mahmoud Reda's work was all about creating theatrical fantasies based on culture, and Egyptians adore him. I took my Egyptian guide with me to the show "The World Dances with Mahmoud Reda" in Alexandria on July 1. I'd say Reda's work is proof that Middle Eastern people can enjoy fantasies about their own culture so long as those fantasies are grounded in recognizable reality.

I don't know about comparative size of diasporas, but I do know the U.S. has very large populations of Armenians, Lebanese, and Persians. The Persians largely came here around the time of the fall of the Shah. The Armenians fled both Iran and Turkey. The Lebanese started coming here around the end of the 19th century - back then, it was to escape Ottoman domination, and more recently, to escape the Civil War. All of these cultures appreciate good raqs sharqi. The ones I've met from all three groups also tend to be well-educated and intelligent - the type of people who would appreciate theatrical artifice if done well. But yes, it would need to be done to their taste, and someone on stilts with Isis wings (which was part of a BDSS show) would probably not be to their taste.

Mahmoud Reda's work was all about creating theatrical fantasies based on culture, and Egyptians adore him.

Yeah, for *Egyptians*. Not for Americans. Reda's work was originally by Egyptians, for Egyptians, not aimed at tourists. Miles Copeland isn't Mahmoud Reda; he's not selling Americans/non ME people a fantasy of their own bucolic past, otherwise Jillina et al would be doing square dancing and tap. In gingham. BDSS and Reda are not really comparable.

And as I wrote, the US diaspora put its own performance conventions in place when Miles was just a boy, so there is not quite the same *desire* to have fantasies about your past self swanning about on stage. Why would you bother when you can go to your cousin's club and see belly dancers, if that's what you want to see? Not to mention the fact that you might find yourself far too sophisticated to want to see that low-class Arab stuff, which is not an uncommon response.

The Celtic thing is perhaps a little closer *to* Reda, actually, because it's simultaneously a fantasy of other and self. It's also been fashionable in and out of mainstream "Western" (I hate that term (culture) for nearly as long as Oriental themes have been, with the big difference being that it's both for and about white people.

Reda's work was originally by Egyptians, for Egyptians, not aimed at tourists.

And crucially, specifically for Cairenes. The lens gets smaller.

(And arguably...*possibly* tourists from outside of Egypt, or at least they were prioritized, considered, and welcomed as an audience before other non-Cairo based Egyptians.)

I like a good gimmick now and then, but I have to agree...good dancing is good dancing. I think even the GP prefers good dancing and, maybe even more importantly, sincere audience interaction and relayed emotion, more than a gimmick. Who doesn't like the occassional sword, shamadan, dance on a drum, double veil act? I love to break out the wings for the "ooh, aaah" factor. But what do I consistently get the most comments on?? Fun & flirty audience interaction...a cute hair flip...an unexpected shoulder shrug... a well timed "no no" finger wiggle in a drum solo... (once did this to a man's back after he tipped me and turned around, and the whole room erupted in laughter & applause). I think the audience loves it when the dancer genuinely enjoys herself (or hisself)... and that's the bottom line.

Originally Posted by Sonja2

I think the audience loves it when the dancer genuinely enjoys herself (or hisself)... and that's the bottom line.

I've been thinking about this and I have to agree with this and Sabrina's statement. It's the intent that makes all the difference. Once a performer is pigeonholed into a certain schtick, how long do you think they can go on presenting it as a gift to the audience? When does it become the same old thing to the performer (at which point the audience starts to feel it)? At some point, after years of doing the same thing (particularly if doing the same schtick and/or the same choreographies rehashed by the same choreographer), it must become just a job...where you are forced to plaster your smile on your face and get it over with. No magic is left.

Originally Posted by nasila

I've been thinking about this and I have to agree with this and Sabrina's statement. It's the intent that makes all the difference. Once a performer is pigeonholed into a certain schtick, how long do you think they can go on presenting it as a gift to the audience? When does it become the same old thing to the performer (at which point the audience starts to feel it)? At some point, after years of doing the same thing (particularly if doing the same schtick and/or the same choreographies rehashed by the same choreographer), it must become just a job...where you are forced to plaster your smile on your face and get it over with. No magic is left.

True, true! The importance of continuing to challenge oneself & learn new things!

I don't have much to add, but this is a GREAT thread, and I am enjoying everyone's responses.

We had a swap sale this weekend in our dance community, and I sold 2 of my BDSS DVDS (2 of the 3...I think I kept the first one). When the woman who bought them from me asked why I was getting rid of them, my response was "I'm just sick of BDSS."
Not the DANCERS...I love the individual dancers. I don't like the gimmicks...and I don't like that the show has basically been the same for the last...oh...what...5 years?

Anyway.
I'm interested to continue reading everyone's thoughts. :)