Thread: Originality and signature moves

It seems as though once a dancer becomes popular, there is a stampede of people to mimic her signature moves.

For example, in the Tribal Fusion world we have the deep backbends of Rachel Brice. In the Egyptian world, we have that silly butt twist that Dina throws into her large hip circles. I could give lots of other examples, but I think those are enough to make the point.

I've watched some performances which seem to be tributes to whichever dancer the performer happens to admire, with a series of that person's signature moves strung together. Usually, the star's costume style is also mimicked.

Isn't "dance" supposed to be creative?

What's original about mimicking someone's costuming and signature moves down to the last detail?

I have a suspicion that some women do it for purely personal reasons. Also, a way to pay respect to their favorites. Dance doesn't always have to be creative, it's an expression.

I recently saw a dancer whose style I have always liked. She was doing a choreography by a well-known dancer. It was eerie how the body language and even her face became almost identical to the choreographer. It was really well done but it left me with an odd feeling. I like seeing a dancer's personality come out in her dancing. To me, technique is important but it's not the thing I love most about a dancer. It's the connection and the glimpse into a dancer's soul that really move me.

that butt twist hip circle is a signature move? I see everybody do it (and personally, I think it looks weird) I prefer Alima's spins, maybe b/c she is classically ballet trained and just spins like mad. But it's usually straight up and just looks beautiful with that posture.


oh, but I wouldnt' think someone should mimic every move down to the detail, but some creative overlap is bound to happen. Could just be other people have had the idea too. But taking every move and costume from someone is a bit shady.

Maybe some of it comes from who their teacher is. I've noticed that sometimes you can who is a student of someone based on how they dance. It's inevitable I suppose.
Personally, I'm all for trying to find your own signature moves. Way more fun...l;,

I tell you, this is something that has sort of bothered me in watching a lot of dance videos. It seems that there is a certain "uniform" that dancers wear... in some cases, like traditional costumes is fine, but I see so much mimicking, it gets old. You forget who is who.

See, I, ever before bdance, have had a passion for making costumes, clothing, jewelry, etc. So, this art was a great choice for me because I can express myself creatively through my costuming as well. I'd like to see more of that - I enjoy the full expressiveness visually that dance can be.

As for styles, I think that people sometimes look at something and think, "that's cool," try to incorporate it some, and then hop on to the next. Then again, though, the repetition model is one of the strongest ways to learn - watch and do. I'm quite the novice with bellydance, and I find myself watching a LOT of videos, trying to figure out what makes these dancers look so great. I don't think there is anything wrong with that, until that becomes ALL that you do... and don't take it in your own direction.

If you haven't already seen this, it's fun. I'm not familiar with the Russian dancers, but I think he does a great job with his Orit (2nd) and Dina (4th) impersonations.
[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L2N8ShCi_HU]YouTube - Belly Dance Stars Parody Ð�лекÑ�ей Ð*Ñ�бошапка[/ame]

The two examples cited could be considered as founders of their respective styles. In that case is it any wonder that those proceeding would emulate that style?

Popular dancers of any given era usually end up defining the style of that era, so it's not surprising that if one wishes to be fluent in that "style" then to the source they must go.

In regards to Dina, she is iconic and it wasn't too long ago that Randa and Soraya were Dina clones, but are now working their own style within the larger modern Egyptian styling. Perhaps it is just a natural progression of assimilating movement markers of a new style before finding your own expression of it?

Replicating a signature move is a far step from replicating an entire series of movements and costuming, the former being quite common and not limiting to creativity, and the latter is definitely lacking in originality and in turn has the potential to limit creativity.

So many people want to dance exactly like x dancer. I think it's a little odd when they costume and style themselves such that you can almost not distinguish the original from someone else. Even actors who play some classic role throw at least a bit of their own personal interpretation of the character.

Maybe, though, this imitation, albeit extreme, is people's way of finding their own style.

If no dancer ever copied or tried to rival another one, there would probably be about five movements total.

Ahh...signature moves. Otherwise known as, "That thing I always do when I can't think of anything else!" ..l;,

i personally think its ok to "borrow" a famous dancer's signature moves just to spice up a performance or to expand one's own method of expression...but i agree with Shira, to mimic someone completely is unoriginal; even if they are the perfect copy, their talent wont be appreciated...they'd be called wannabes :/

Originally Posted by zumarrad

If no dancer ever copied or tried to rival another one, there would probably be about five movements total.

This was my thought -- I'll bet all the moves we think of as 'the basic movement vocabulary' were once someone's signature moves. Who was the first to shimmy? To move her hips in a figure 8? To undulate her torso? To walk flat-ball-ball-ball sideways while undulating?

the whole reason I pay big bucks to attend people's workshops is to learn their movements and their way of interacting with the music. I hope to absorb a little of each teachers style into my dance. One of my students kept telling me she was 'stealing' my moves for her solos -- I told her 'that's not stealing, you bought those!'

I agree, though, that copying one dancer's style and vocabulary isn't very creative.

Learning a dancers moves and incorporating them into your own dance is GREAT and that is what we should do, but, Shira is saying, why would I wear the same pinkish outfit that Lauren wore dancing to Fakarouni and do the same exact moves you do at the same time, musically. That is uncreative.

I only WISH I could emulate my favorites...
however posture,carriage and facial expressions would be missing even if I got the move going:)

Athenaserpent gets my point.

You can dance Egyptian style without trying to be an imitation of Dina.

You can convey a tribal fusion aesthetic without trying to be an imitation of Rachel Brice.

I'm not saying people should make a point of consciously avoiding using signature moves for fear of being accused of stealing. I agree with those who say that if we tried to avoid doing someone's signature moves our vocabularies would be limited indeed.

Instead, my point is that trying to make yourself an exact copy of a certain dancer is going to make you look like a distorted copy of the original. Try this: take a photograph to an office copy machine and copy it. Compare the original photograph to the copy. The copy is what a dancer who tries to imitate someone famous looks like - you can recognize who she's imitating, but she looks like a distortion of the original.

OK, got it. Yes, I've seen the freakish clones, and they are scary.

Originally Posted by *Shira*

Athenaserpent gets my point.

You can dance Egyptian style without trying to be an imitation of Dina.

You can convey a tribal fusion aesthetic without trying to be an imitation of Rachel Brice.

I'm not saying people should make a point of consciously avoiding using signature moves for fear of being accused of stealing. I agree with those who say that if we tried to avoid doing someone's signature moves our vocabularies would be limited indeed.

Instead, my point is that trying to make yourself an exact copy of a certain dancer is going to make you look like a distorted copy of the original. Try this: take a photograph to an office copy machine and copy it. Compare the original photograph to the copy. The copy is what a dancer who tries to imitate someone famous looks like - you can recognize who she's imitating, but she looks like a distortion of the original.

A point one of my teachers instilled in me is that I should just try dancing like myself and that none of the copies look as good as the original. It's almost like you set yourself up for failure if you try to be x person, rather than taking your own unique perspective on something.

Shira, I do wonder about one your questions about creativity and dance. Do the clones want to be creative?

I think I'd be less critical of the lack of originality and blatant clones if they had more awareness- like an Elvis impersonator. I always have the feeling that carbon copies don't realize that they are just that.

I think it is only natural to attempt to emulate dancers we admore and look up to. What differentiates a dancer who is a good technician VS a dancer who is a good conceptualist to me is whether they absorb the exact movements and expression of another dancer or if they take the concept and intent and manipulate it in their own vision/artistic feel/expression. The latter requiring a lot of more work, maturity and awareness on the dancer's part... some dancers just dont get to the point where they can liberate themselves from the visual examples in front of them.

Some people become trendsetters, some become an extension of the trends, some merely follow the trends. It's just how things work.

Another thing is the fact that being able to emulate certain traits shows ability and attention to detail on the performer's part.

In fact, to some it is the greatest compliment that someone recognizes their effort to absorb their rolemodels' flavor, essence, style, expression or what you prefer to call it. It is basically their goal in dance to achieve to dance like XX person.

It also can feel safer to "hide behind" someone acclaimed's work. It is like a shield against having to take critique personally. "They can critique my technique, but what I do is the same as XX - and she's famous, so therefore it isnt wrong". It's a comfortable blankie to hide under for some.

Frankly...some just dont have the desire to spend that much time in the dance to "develop something different" either. Nothing wrong with that. Each to their own focus and prioritization. I can totally understand someone preferring to give other parts of their lives priority ahead of the individual artistic and visionary and expressive development of their dancing. After all, not everyone has an understanding spouse, wallet or mortage broker :P

We all have different focuses... :)
DaVid

Originally Posted by kiyaana

If you haven't already seen this, it's fun. I'm not familiar with the Russian dancers, but I think he does a great job with his Orit (2nd) and Dina (4th) impersonations.

oh my God, that was so funny. He is really good! Was the first impersonation supposed to be Maria Shashkova? I swear she dances like that, he got exactly how she is, especially her arms.

Originally Posted by *Shira*

You can dance Egyptian style without trying to be an imitation of Dina.

True.

Could you dance what is now loosely known as Modern Egyptian Style or Cairo Style in Cairo in the mid-late 90's without imitating Dina?

I am not trying to prove a point but am genuinely interested in suggestions as I don't think there would be many examples. Dandesh comes to mind, but were there any others?

Originally Posted by NandaDncer

Could you dance what is now loosely known as Modern Egyptian Style or Cairo Style in Cairo in the mid-late 90's without imitating Dina?

I guess I don't see it as being necessary to slice Egyptian dance that thinly.

Instead of worrying about whether one's style is "Golden Age", "1980's", or "Modern Cairo", why not just discover what all these styles have in common, polish one's technique foundation, choose an inspiring piece of Egyptian music, and then dance from the heart?

Originally Posted by david

I think it is only natural to attempt to emulate dancers we admore and look up to. What differentiates a dancer who is a good technician VS a dancer who is a good conceptualist to me is whether they absorb the exact movements and expression of another dancer or if they take the concept and intent and manipulate it in their own vision/artistic feel/expression. The latter requiring a lot of more work, maturity and awareness on the dancer's part... some dancers just dont get to the point where they can liberate themselves from the visual examples in front of them.

Some people become trendsetters, some become an extension of the trends, some merely follow the trends. It's just how things work.

DaVid

Word!

From a student's perspective... I think it can be a confusing evolutionary process. When you begin to dance, you are trying to copy your teacher, because she is doing it "right" and you are not. You take classes from more teachers, and you find out that there are many "right" ways to do things, and some of them work better for you than others. You perform others' choreographies because you can't make your own, and you are given "style pointers" to best get across the Yousry-ness or Suhaila-ness or whoever-ness of the dance, marrying the style and the dance together.

Then you try to develop your own style and it's really hard. You might feel like you are throwing out the baby with the bathwater, like you've lost all the style you felt you gained, trying to find your own. You might want to go back to emulating someone for a while, then switch back out of that, and eventually... painfully... you look like yourself, with only some little homages to your idols.

Similarly, if you see a dancer doing something you haven't seen before that you really like, you might try to learn how to do it.

I have been guilty of trying to "imitate" some of the movements done by a very good technical dancer that used to dance at my school. Being so much more advanced than myself she was farther ahead in lessons and sometimes I would see her do things that were very beautiful that I just had to learn. Eventually I'd get to them but they captivated me NOW so I'd try and imitate what I'd seen on a move here and there.

She has since moved on to another town and is launching her career there. I miss getting to see how she put what we all learned into action. Right now there isn't anyone in my school who really steps out and tries to use the very unique style of our instructor quite like she did.

Originally Posted by tigerb

From a student's perspective... I think it can be a confusing evolutionary process. When you begin to dance, you are trying to copy your teacher, because she is doing it "right" and you are not. You take classes from more teachers, and you find out that there are many "right" ways to do things, and some of them work better for you than others. You perform others' choreographies because you can't make your own, and you are given "style pointers" to best get across the Yousry-ness or Suhaila-ness or whoever-ness of the dance, marrying the style and the dance together.

Then you try to develop your own style and it's really hard. You might feel like you are throwing out the baby with the bathwater, like you've lost all the style you felt you gained, trying to find your own. You might want to go back to emulating someone for a while, then switch back out of that, and eventually... painfully... you look like yourself, with only some little homages to your idols.

You hit the nail on the head, tigerb.

I think it's inevitable that anything we do has been done by someone else. I take from a number of teachers, and have many different inspirations in videos that I watch. I think many of them have something that shows up in my dance, but because I have so many influences, I don't look like a carbon-copy of anyone. In my opinion anyway, looking out from the inside.

I have some moves that I didn't invent but are more "me" - things that I do often. I could never claim to have invented them - it seems like everything we do has been done before - and if it hasn't, there just might be a good a reason for it.

Originally Posted by *Shira*

I guess I don't see it as being necessary to slice Egyptian dance that thinly.

Instead of worrying about whether one's style is "Golden Age", "1980's", or "Modern Cairo", why not just discover what all these styles have in common, polish one's technique foundation, choose an inspiring piece of Egyptian music, and then dance from the heart?

Heaven is in the details.

And some of us are just nerds of course
..l;,..l;,..l;,

Originally Posted by tigerb

From a student's perspective... I think it can be a confusing evolutionary process. When you begin to dance, you are trying to copy your teacher, because she is doing it "right" and you are not. You take classes from more teachers, and you find out that there are many "right" ways to do things, and some of them work better for you than others. You perform others' choreographies because you can't make your own, and you are given "style pointers" to best get across the Yousry-ness or Suhaila-ness or whoever-ness of the dance, marrying the style and the dance together.

Then you try to develop your own style and it's really hard. You might feel like you are throwing out the baby with the bathwater, like you've lost all the style you felt you gained, trying to find your own. You might want to go back to emulating someone for a while, then switch back out of that, and eventually... painfully... you look like yourself, with only some little homages to your idols.

Exactly.

Copying the masters is a long-established method of teaching an inexperienced student the craft of whatever -- painting, dance, writing.

I've been in fiction workshops with some of my idols and they've all agreed -- imitation is the best way to learn your craft. With much practice, that imitation of someone else's craft becomes your original art.

Sometimes we see people performing when they're still in their imitation phase. That's not a bad thing, but we have to recognize it for what it is.

Neil Gaiman's novelization of "Neverwhere" is a wonderful piece of imitation. You can literally pick out the parts where he's imitating Gene Wolf, or Frank Miller, or Douglas Adams. It took him years of comics and short stories before he finally found his original voice. Neverwhere is good, but it's no American Gods. I've performed in my imitation phase too, and I had fun, but I can do better now. :) At least I hope so!


And correct me if I'm wrong, but I swear I've seen the big hip circle with itty bitty twists inside it LONG before Dina was a major player. Like in the black and white "Stars of Egypt" footage. ??? So did Dina steal someone else's sig move and shorten it to one twist? :)