Thread: Good fusion or bad fusion?

On a different thread, Daniela asked, "What constitutes good fusion?" and "Who gets to decide?" I think those are both terrific questions for a thread!

I'll start, but I'd love to hear what others say.

I think good fusion:

1. Chooses music that is itself fused. For example, Alabina is music that fuses both Arabic and Spanish sounds, so it could be a good foundation for a fusion of belly dance and flamenco.

2. Is done by a dancer who is knowledgeable about each dance form being utilized. This means that a belly dancer who wants to create an Arabic / Spanish fusion dance to Alabina should go get some lessons in Spanish dance from someone who specializes in that.

3. Is created with the right intention. "Right" intention would be seeking to bring together two things that are different but have something in common, and then looking for a way to blend them that seems to fit well together. "Wrong" intention would be throwing together a bunch of unrelated things that are "kewl" just for the sheer fun of playing with them.

4. Considers all aspects of the performance in the creative process. In other words, the music, the underlying dance technique, the costuming, the props (if any) are all carefully chosen to support some larger unified vision.

I'll let someone else take the first pass at "Who gets to decide what's good and what's not?"

All good points. Cohesion and coherency are incredibly important to good fusion.

As for who decides if it's any good? Who decides what constitutes a good ME performance, or a good ballet performance, or a good flute performance?

I just like to see the elements come together seamlessly, so you can't tell where one part begins and the other ends.

Personally, and I have been guilty of this, I dislike seeing a dancer 'think' on stage. And this is true with both Fusion and straight dancing. Of any type.

{{{HUGS}}}

Everything said is great so far. I personally lean very much towards Tahira's comment about the elements coming together seamlessly... I dont know how many times I've seen dancers do "fusion" by doing 16 counts of pure Classical Indian dance and then add 2 hip drops on the end to make it "fusion".

The definition of fusion is pretty simple actually: Element A is fused with Element B to create Element C.

To me, proper fusion exudes class and credibility in addition to all of the points listed above. In other words, it looks well researched, aesthetically pleasing and respectable. Here's the litmus test: would audiences get confused? Offended? Would you get fired from an upscale restaurant if you tried that type of fusion there? Would it make somebody of Arabic descent proud or disturbed?

Zambra always makes for beautiful fusion, due to its unique history. The BDSS "Bellynesian" number was kind of nice, because it had elements of drum solos (traditional to Tahitian and Arabic music). And I have a lot of respect for Tempest, Ayshe, Neon, Ava Fleming and Dalia Carella - their fusion is always exquisite and perfectly executed.

However, I have a very hard time putting my seal of approval on scary burlesque fusion, anything involving freaky dolls, and bondage-vampire-gothic stuff performed to non-Arabic music. Maybe it's because the darkity-dark stuff is so far removed from what I envision to be the spirit of the dance (upbeat, cheerful - and even hopeful and beautiful when it's toned down and sad), or maybe because BD is naturally sensual and I wonder why we must drive the point home in assless chaps. But at a certain point, one must wonder: "WTF do bat wings have to do with bellydance?"

It's sort of like the old saying about pornography, isn't it? "I can't define it, but I know it when I see it!"

IMHO, the difference is that good fusion leaves the audience thinking, "Wow, that was cool! I never thought of anything like that before." Good fusion is innovative, clever, familiar-yet-new. It demands audience appreciation of the expertise of the performer.

Bad fusion leaves the audience thinking, "What was that?!", or even worse, "That was a weird mess!" Bad fusion is inelegant, self-indulgent, and sometimes downright stupid. It leaves the audience uncomfortable, bored, or embarrassed for the performer.

Does anybody remember the old MGM cartoon, "The Dot and the Line: A Romance in Lower Mathematics"? Good fusion is the line after he learned to bend, and bad fusion is the squiggle.

My big one is point 2!!

Before fusion one should know what one is fusing!!!

Originally Posted by SatinWorship19

However, I have a very hard time putting my seal of approval on scary burlesque fusion, anything involving freaky dolls, and bondage-vampire-gothic stuff performed to non-Arabic music. Maybe it's because the darkity-dark stuff is so far removed from what I envision to be the spirit of the dance (upbeat, cheerful - and even hopeful and beautiful when it's toned down and sad), or maybe because BD is naturally sensual and I wonder why we must drive the point home in assless chaps. But at a certain point, one must wonder: "WTF do bat wings have to do with bellydance?"

To SatinWorship's point, I think fusion has become a catch-all term for anything that shows up at a hafla or similar event, and isn't actually straight belly dancing (or belly dancing at all for that matter). To me, fusion actually takes elements of oriental dance and combines it with another dance form - Polynesian, flamenco, or hip-hop for example. I would call the type of dancing described above as experimental.

Originally Posted by Zamira

To SatinWorship's point, I think fusion has become a catch-all term for anything that shows up at a hafla or similar event, and isn't actually straight belly dancing (or belly dancing at all for that matter). To me, fusion actually takes elements of oriental dance and combines it with another dance form - Polynesian, flamenco, or hip-hop for example. I would call the type of dancing described above as experimental.

I agree with this point. The term fusion has frequently been misused for experimental or alternative dance.

I'd reiterate Shira's point number one: the music itself is fused. That's what makes the whole thing hang together.

I think anyone can dance to whatever they want, but they have to know their venue, as was mentioned in another thread. Perform at Tribal Fest or other events where experimental dance is celebrated. Find the avant garde venues in your area. Don't expect to be embraced by the belly dance scene if you don't really have an interest in belly dancing.

Originally Posted by Zamira

To SatinWorship's point, I think fusion has become a catch-all term for anything that shows up at a hafla or similar event, and isn't actually straight belly dancing (or belly dancing at all for that matter). To me, fusion actually takes elements of oriental dance and combines it with another dance form - Polynesian, flamenco, or hip-hop for example. I would call the type of dancing described above as experimental.

Yeah, good catch. I've always used the term fusion to describe any dances that apply non-BD elements to BD, regardless of how well integrated they are. Then again, some of what I've seen in my neighborhood defies explanation....experimental is certainly the polite way to put it .w.:

good fusion i think involves already 'fused' items, or a dramatic, beautiful, enigmatic expression of non ME themes.....

example.....one of my fave pieces, and right up my alley is a rai/celtic mix by cheb mami and a celtic band called Aswaw (on 'dublin to dakar' CD)....a seamless transition and it makes SENSE and wonderful.....and done right....very danceable.......my dance friends all know that little quirk of mine :p

i've seen 'darkety-dark' (thanks satin :p) done beautifully, by very talented dancers, but because they used beauty and DRAMA to convey the music.....good artistic expression....

bad fusion is either trite, derivative, or 'shock factor' (read blood, nudity, weird imagery), or just having no CLUE as to the thing you're fusing with......too many times i've seen indian fusion with the wide stance and temple arms and poorly executed arms........too many bad hip hop, too many stereotype of gothic......why? they thought it was a good idea and didn't study the other dance arts, or thought a vid or two was enuf...some just imitated thinking 'how hard can it be'?

i'm all about fusion when done well, cuz there is some amazing, non-ME music that just pops a choreo or image in your head, and many i've seen have been amazing......it's about innovation, and drama, and beauty, and keeps our lovely art from going stale and keeps it growing and reaching.......but it DOES have to make sense

Originally Posted by dunyah

I agree with this point. The term fusion has frequently been misused for experimental or alternative dance.

I'd reiterate Shira's point number one: the music itself is fused. That's what makes the whole thing hang together.

I think anyone can dance to whatever they want, but they have to know their venue, as was mentioned in another thread. Perform at Tribal Fest or other events where experimental dance is celebrated. Find the avant garde venues in your area. Don't expect to be embraced by the belly dance scene if you don't really have an interest in belly dancing.

This is something I think is very true. I have been trying to support the use of experimental belly dance for the more edgy performances that are less about fusing different styles and more about expressing a farther artistic vision. Good point!

I like fusion, dislike confusion! That would be when the audience is very confusioned! The WTF factor I believe makes it confusion. As stated if you are doing experimental dance then don't call it belly dance at all.
Fusion done well is wonderful, using "fusion" as an excuse for poor technique and general poor dance skills is a problem sometimes. Those who perform fusion should study both forms or what are they fusing?

On the topic of "Who has the right to judge whether a fusion is good or bad?"...

I think the event organizer or restaurant owner has the right to judge whether a given fusion concept is appropriate to the venue. If someone wants to organize a show with the stipulation of "Middle Eastern music only" I'd say the organizer has the right to do it. Though this isn't really passing judgment on the merits of a particular performance, it's more a statement of what genre of dance is acceptable for a given show.

So let's say a given fusion piece has been accepted by the organizer. Then the next question is whether it's good or not.

In this case, I would say that the people who have a right to comment on whether it's good or not are those who:

1. Have sufficient experience/knowledge of the dance forms being utilized to know whether the performer is actually educated in those dance forms.

2. Are not close friends/family of the performer and therefore not likely to think it's good simply because the performer is someone they love in real life.

3. Were not involved in helping create the choreography, costuming, etc.

Who else would you all think should be included in the category of "gets to decide"?

Any remotely educated person I think should get to decide. Someone who isn't going to think the piece is great, because everyone was nude.

I say that, because I think there is validity in the general public. My boyfriend has watched clips of dance with me and sees things that he likes or dislikes with valid arguments. He has no idea why they're "good" or "bad" in terms of their respected art forms, but he does have a decent aesthetic.

Originally Posted by *Shira*

Who else would you all think should be included in the category of "gets to decide"?

Depends on what you mean by 'gets to decide.'

anyone paying for the performance certainly goes in this category. Just because I'm not a trained chef or certified gourmet doesn't mean I can't send my food back to the kitchen if I think it's awful.

So.... a restaurant owner. Restaurant patrons. Anyone who bought a ticket. An event organizer who gave free admission to the performer. And so on.

************

In another way, though, I'm not going to deny anyone the right to their opinion whether they paid for a performance or not. If my best friend did horrible fusion in my living room for me, I certainly have the right to decide that it was, to my eyes, bad. So anyone who's had their eyes scorched by a performance they hated has the right to call it bad.

**************

On yet another level, what do we mean by 'decide' it's bad? If we don't mean personal opinion, or whether to hire/go see that dancer again, then what do we mean? Although people can stop paying for your performances, they can't stop you from creating awful work. No one can stop you from creating awful work. Heck, I JUST THIS MINUTE created some really AWFUL dancing, and none of you can stop me. MWA HAH HAHHHH!!!

BTW, kudos to Shira for taking up her resolution to start interesting threads!

I think some confusion might also exist if you're not paying attention to the music and its history. I'll try to elaborate:

1. One of my favorite pieces of music is already fused: it's by an Israeli band called Kahol and it's their interpretation of a Scottish song called "Far From Home" (The album, to give you an idea, is entitled Celtic Camel. They know what they're dong!). It's got a definite beledi rhythm underlying the whole thing, but large parts of it are a very Celtic reel. It's hard to miss either. I love to dance to this with zills playing to the rhythm and my moves matching the cadence. Hard to describe but fun to do. Audiences, even GP, really enjoy this: it's upbeat, fun, and sassy.

So, this fits Shira's first point: the music is already fused so it makes sense to dance it as a fusion. (a friend refers to this performance as my Turkish Leprechaun bit)

2. On the same sort of wavelength, I perform a lot to Irish Punk and Hip-Hop. OK, I only know of one Irish HipHop band, but I dance to their stuff. And I love dancing to The Pogues. However, Celtic music and Turkish music are closely related (not just my opinion; I've heard it mentioned by a number of anthropologists) so I have no problem dancing Turkish style to an Irish band.

This is where things get strange. People that love the music tend to like the performance. Purists of either the music or the dance don't. And, while I know that it makes sense to fuse them together, the connection may not make sense to someone that isn't very familiar to Turkish music.

So, this IS fusion by most definitions; I believe that I'm good enough to make it seamless, but it might still not be everyone's favorite.

3. This is a combo: Leon Redbone (if you're not familiar with him, he's kind of a junk jazz/lounge singer) does a great piece of music called "Shake that Thing" that has a great Charleston section in it. I'm dancing to it, using both bellydance and Charleston moves. The there's the Teddybear's great song "Cobrastyle" which is nothing but attitude. Mine, too.

I wouldn't call either of these "fusion". They're two fun pieces of music being used by a Middle eastern dancer that's having fun. Oh, and I wouldn't do them at a "serious" show or for the GP either; these are reserved for haflis and fun!

Kitty

Bad fusion leaves the audience thinking, "What was that?!", or even worse, "That was a weird mess!" Bad fusion is inelegant, self-indulgent, and sometimes downright stupid. It leaves the audience uncomfortable, bored, or embarrassed for the performer.

Most of the bad fusion I have seen over the years has been characterised by the following:

1) A complete mish-mash of various ideas and fragments from general performance arts, apparently compiled (and I use that term loosely) with a complete pic 'n' mix approach.

2) A strong sense that it is all about the perfomer(s) and that entertaining the audience is entirely secondary, or even tertiary to a personal need to flaunt.

3) Reveal only a superficial comprehension (if that) of any of the elements involved in the fusion, up to and including belly dance.

4) Leave the audience, whoever they may be, utterly bewildered and feeling excluded and distanced.

With regard to point 3, I think it is unrealistic to expect fusion dancers to have a completely encyclopedic knowledge of the forms that they are fusing (though that would be a nice change) but I expect a more than perfunctory grasp of the elements involved.

A word to burlesque fusionists here: Burlesque does not, and never has entailed standing on a stage, dressed in a garter belt, smoking, and looking bored. Get a grip and keep the repressed prostitute fantasies at home.

With regard to point 4. This is what makes pretty much everyone qualified to decide whether its good or bad. There will always be someone, maybe more than one who wont 'get' it, but if and when entire audiences are able to sit in WTF horror whilst screwing up the strength to clap politely then they are capable of making this kind of value judgment.

Originally Posted by khadiya

A word to burlesque fusionists here: Burlesque does not, and never has entailed standing on a stage, dressed in a garter belt, smoking, and looking bored. Get a grip and keep the repressed prostitute fantasies at home.

I'm not worthy! I'm not worthy!

Seriously, though. It appears quite common for the belly-burley fusionists to assume a facial expression indicative of an impending and stifled fart. True burlesque performers, on the other hand, exhibit a zest for life and a love of what they're doing. They smile a lot. And they certainly don't dance to robots farting music. In fact, a lot of their music is lighthearted. And, dare I say, fun. Not to be a bee in anyone's bustle, or anything.

But shhhh....don't tell the militant fusionistadores of Countess Chocola's Belly Brothel of Despair. Having fun and not looking constipated just might ruin their street cred.

And we all know that bellydance is a great old dance wherein denizens of a secret ya-ya sisterhood competed for the scarce resource of street cred in between taking in the ancient wisdom of Californians. Really, it says so on the cave paintings!

Originally Posted by SatinWorship19

I'm not worthy! I'm not worthy!

Seriously, though. It appears quite common for the belly-burley fusionists to assume a facial expression indicative of an impending and stifled fart. True burlesque performers, on the other hand, exhibit a zest for life and a love of what they're doing. They smile a lot. And they certainly don't dance to robots farting music. In fact, a lot of their music is lighthearted. And, dare I say, fun. Not to be a bee in anyone's bustle, or anything.

Absolutely. Good fusion has to do justice to both the dance forms involved. Burlesque has it's own music, costume, attitude and choreography, it is very rare to see a belly-burly performance that actually takes any of that into account. The better (and I use the term loosely) ones that I have seen have involved a bellydancer with fans. The fans being the only recognisable burly element, and rarely used to their potential. At a hafla last year I saw a troupe pull off technically appauling bellydance wearing cheap basques (with the suspenders hanging loose over their circle skirts) and waving feather boas. It wasn't interesting, cheeky, fun, teasing or at all attractive! I had one of those moments when I contemplated chewing my own leg off to get out, but I had to perform after so i restrained myself ;)

Originally Posted by Kash13

I had one of those moments when I contemplated chewing my own leg off to get out, but I had to perform after so i restrained myself ;)

Good for you; I admire your restraint. ..g.:

Originally Posted by Sasheen

Good for you; I admire your restraint. ..g.:

It might have been more the fear of what my teacher would do if I turned around and said "look love, I can't do the saiidi piece tonight, I ate my own leg." ..g.:

Originally Posted by Kash13

Absolutely. Good fusion has to do justice to both the dance forms involved. Burlesque has it's own music, costume, attitude and choreography, it is very rare to see a belly-burly performance that actually takes any of that into account. The better (and I use the term loosely) ones that I have seen have involved a bellydancer with fans. The fans being the only recognisable burly element, and rarely used to their potential. At a hafla last year I saw a troupe pull off technically appauling bellydance wearing cheap basques (with the suspenders hanging loose over their circle skirts) and waving feather boas. It wasn't interesting, cheeky, fun, teasing or at all attractive! I had one of those moments when I contemplated chewing my own leg off to get out, but I had to perform after so i restrained myself ;)

I was about to say, OMG, you were there too?? And then I remembered you're in the UK ;))

Originally Posted by SatinWorship19

And we all know that bellydance is a great old dance wherein denizens of a secret ya-ya sisterhood competed for the scarce resource of street cred in between taking in the ancient wisdom of Californians. Really, it says so on the cave paintings!

ROFLMAO.

It's funny, because it's true.

;)

Originally Posted by rosehips

I was about to say, OMG, you were there too?? And then I remembered you're in the UK ;))

It's a worldwide epidemic!

Either that or there is just this one godawful troupe touring every hafla they can get to.

Good fusion has to do justice to both the dance forms involved. Burlesque has it's own music, costume, attitude and choreography, it is very rare to see a belly-burly performance that actually takes any of that into account. The better (and I use the term loosely) ones that I have seen have involved a bellydancer with fans. The fans being the only recognisable burly element, and rarely used to their potential. At a hafla last year I saw a troupe pull off technically appauling bellydance wearing cheap basques (with the suspenders hanging loose over their circle skirts) and waving feather boas. It wasn't interesting, cheeky, fun, teasing or at all attractive! I had one of those moments when I contemplated chewing my own leg off to get out, but I had to perform after so i restrained myself ;)

Sigh

Welcome to my world . Mwah hah hah hah...