Thread: bellynesian

just thinking here.. I have seen lots of debate about the new Sonia dvd. In the rebuttals being offered to the Gilded Serpent article, it seems that nobody has so far addressed what I thought (perhaps incorrectly) was the author's main point:

However, there is another aspect to Polynesian dance. Not all Polynesian dance is secular (nonreligious). ..Many in the Polynesian community and Polynesian Dance community see this as another example of exploitation, of complete disregard and lack of respect for their viewpoint, their culture and their RELIGION!

In the current discussions I've seen, so far I haven't noticed any acknowledgment of the religious & spiritual aspect.

the christian missionairys (sp), took their way of worship , DANCE, away....and left them with small pox, i might add.
james mitchner has a great historical noval, "hawaii"....it is worth a re read, or watch the movie! it is sickening what the whites diud to them in the name of jesus.

just a PS to my original post - I am also wondering if there is any information available as to what Polynesian was fused by Sonia in her video. (I am not on the BDSS mailing list.) Did she use the religious dances? Although I don't know her very well, I was acquainted with her when living in SoCal and she has never struck me as being a jerk.

As far as I know (which ain't much) each school has their own dances, with it's own twists that are religious in nature and sacred. These are not to be messed with.

However, each kumu can and does create new choreographies to other music, not the sacred songs, and can add anything in there that makes sense to them.

hey, do you have a link to the article?

Art changes. People change. Hybridization is a part of life and social interaction. Everyone engages in it to some degree in some forum of life. Can it be stopped? Is it supposed to be stopped? If it had come from the other direction (polynesian dancers fusing modern dance and Orientale in their shows) would we (orientale dancers) have a problem with it? Look what happened with Flamenco when it became popular. Look whats happening to Zar. What impact does Budhism have on modern Native American religion? What kind of effect did artistic and religious hybridization from Classical Egypt have on the Roman Empire when the Cult of Isis traveled North? Is it really something we can make a conscious decission about or does art, humanity and spirituality travel in the direction it's going to travel whether you like it or not?

If you touch something it has an effect. Fingers leave finger prints, touch the water and watch the ripples. Sneezes carry germs. Expose two music and dance traditions to eachother and watch what happens.

~*Genisis*~

Originally Posted by Genisis

Art changes.

But if I'm understanding the Polynesian position correctly, they're not viewing their dance tradition as "art". They're viewing it as a deeply meaningful expression of their spiritual tradition.

I agree that even spiritual traditions change and evolve over time, but who has the right to change someone's religion? The existing practitioners of that religion? Or outsiders who want to convert that spiritual expression into "art" to be twisted into a secular spectacle to entertain an audience of non-believers? I think that's the root of the issue.

Proclaiming oneself to be an "artist" doesn't change anything or confer any special rights.

a mighty HUZZAH to shira!

There are differnet types of Polynesian dance not all are spritual, some are just fun, some are just about love, fishing or rainbows ect. I do polynesain bellydance fusion and I don't see anything wrong with it.

Originally Posted by *Shira*

But if I'm understanding the Polynesian position correctly, they're not viewing their dance tradition as "art". They're viewing it as a deeply meaningful expression of their spiritual tradition.

I agree that even spiritual traditions change and evolve over time, but who has the right to change someone's religion? The existing practitioners of that religion? Or outsiders who want to convert that spiritual expression into "art" to be twisted into a secular spectacle to entertain an audience of non-believers? I think that's the root of the issue.

Proclaiming oneself to be an "artist" doesn't change anything or confer any special rights.

I don't know where you get the idea that polynesian dance is not art? Some is religion some are not, some are just story telling. allow me:

hula kahiko: traditinal hula, some times is spiritural video: [ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AmEzdNqvVQI&mode=related&search=[/ame]

hula Pele: hula for the goddess Pele

hula hoonana: hula just for Fun!

Hula Auana: modren hula video [ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8iYI17KlECs&mode=related&search=[/ame]

hula hapa haole: Western hula dance to songs sung in english video
[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qZeAeeynUDM[/ame]

Originally Posted by *Shira*

But if I'm understanding the Polynesian position correctly, they're not viewing their dance tradition as "art". They're viewing it as a deeply meaningful expression of their spiritual tradition.

I agree that even spiritual traditions change and evolve over time, but who has the right to change someone's religion? The existing practitioners of that religion? Or outsiders who want to convert that spiritual expression into "art" to be twisted into a secular spectacle to entertain an audience of non-believers? I think that's the root of the issue.

Proclaiming oneself to be an "artist" doesn't change anything or confer any special rights.

It really doesn't change anything either. What I am saying is that it is going to happen upon exposure to outside stimuli whether anyone likes it or not. What makes Polynesian dance so special that it can escape the same religous and artistic hybridization that everybody else endures? The original spiritual dance continues to be performed in the traditional way and simultaneously there exists a new artistic expression of it that is not being billed as the real deal/original thing. It is not a spiritual ceremony that is being presented in a banal secular way. It is a few moves and a change in costuming used in a belly dance setting. So unless you think there is something inherently disrespectful about belly dancing I think it would be better to focus on the commonality and respect the fusion piece for finding the similarities between the cultures in a positive way.

~*Genisis*~

Originally Posted by toria_dances

There are differnet types of Polynesian dance not all are spritual, some are just fun, some are just about love, fishing or rainbows ect. I do polynesain bellydance fusion and I don't see anything wrong with it.

Yay for Toria! I don't think its the job of a person outside of Polynesian culture to get perturbed on behalf of Polynesians everywhere. This reminds me of an article I saw on Gildedserpent a couple years ago about too much spinning used by the BDSS and how it "could be" disrespectful to Sufism but the author didn't know enough about the Sufi practices to say for sure. Mmmhmmm... It takes a hell of a lot more than spinning to be a dervish. I suspect it takes a hell of a lot more than a pink grass skirt and a couple props to perform a Polynesian ritual dance of any kind. As ritual dances are my bread and butter I can safely assert to the dance community that in every culture I've examined that uses ritual dance there are secular dances for the common people to enjoy doing just for the fun of it. Dance is for enjoyment as well as ritual. It inspires onlookers and envigorates the dancer.

It would really make my day if dancers would stop getting offended on behalf of other cultures. Some people might be too embarassed to make a single non ME step and that prevents them from enjoying the performances of those who are not afraid to keep dance moving and alive. Some people preserve and some innovate. I think we all have our place in the world of Art.

~*Genisis*~

I'd also like to point out that Polynesian equates to a lot more than Hawaiian and in parts of Polynesia (like the part I live in) there is an ongoing commitment, however tenuous, to biculturalism which *does* give indigenous expressions of spirituality/identity some special protections. That doesn't mean Polynesian forms of expression can't and won't further hybridise (that would be impossible), but it's generally considered polite to check things out with the originators, that's all.

Originally Posted by zumarrad

considered polite to check things out with the originators, that's all.

I agree but Im sure Sonia has never in her life chanted and did a hula to worship the gods while bellydancing.

And is is FALSE to say that traditional Polynesian dance is about religion, and any hula that not sprital is not traditional hula. Polynesian people didn't just dance for religon, polynesian traitional dance is dance about EVRYTHING, not kidding I have seen traditional hulas about, love, death, washing your hair, a pretty necklace, cooking, going to a party, story telling ect. The frist clip I post is a traditional hula about a love triangel

this is a hula that is about religion, but it looks to me that is also about art, and entertainment. look at the crowd they love it [ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UHinx74b8Qk[/ame]

I LOVE this hula the mele is about there love of Hawaii [ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=puelcyhsXQ0&mode=related&search=[/ame]

Originally Posted by toria_dances

There are differnet types of Polynesian dance not all are spritual, some are just fun, some are just about love, fishing or rainbows ect. I do polynesain bellydance fusion and I don't see anything wrong with it.

Well, I was responding to the point Zari made at the beginning of this thread, which was specifically addressing the SACRED songs/dances. Because the point of Zari's original message was to discuss the spiritual angle, I was responding in kind.

If you want to broaden the topic from Zari's original message at the top of this thread to encompass ALL Polynesian dance whether spiritual or not, feel free, but in that case I'll drop out of the discussion. The issue of fusing secular Polynesian dances with belly dance (or anything else) was discussed to death months ago here on bhuz when Naajidah's original article appeared on Gilded Serpent, to the point where I lost interest. I don't mind if others wish to rehash that topic, but I'm not interested in participating.

Hi everyone,

my two cents on both.. and forgive that this is going to be a long rant..

Let me start by saying I spent a lot of time thinking about what it is I do and have done over my 30+ years in bellydance and performing arts. I have come to believe that defining what we do in honesty to ourselves, our students and the public audience is critical to the integrity of the dance. But UNDERSTANDING what we're doing is critical, too.

A'isha Azar once told me she felt that raks sharqi is the only "true" bellydance.. as a fusion dancer, I don't have a problem with this. I'm NOT doing "bellydance", I'm doing a mixture of raks sharqi and the Amercian invention Salome termed American orientale, fused with Jamila Salimpour's original materials. I'm proud of what I've accomplished as a fusion dancer (and by fusion, let me define that as raks sharqi movements combined with American "bellydance" forms, not a hodge-podge of anything I want to throw in the mix.. to me, that's Neobellydance, Neoorientale or Globalorientale dance (raks sharqi or fusion bellydance + any other dance form); but I also make it a point to study raks sharqi so I don't lose the ROOT of this dance.

It's important we understand and respect those roots, art doesn't mean that we have the freedom to take ANY piece of music or form of dance and change it. Some elements of ALL dance are folkloric in nature and belong to a specific culture, and often, religion plays a part. It IS disrespectful to take a deeply religious song or dance and boogie down to it. So knowing what music and songs are appropriate is an important factor in dance: this means, we study. We add to our body of knowledge.

At the same time, I don't have a problem with people taking a dance form that is folkloric, re-designing./developing it as American dancers have done to create American orientale, SO LONG as they understand the root forms and the format. Because there comes a point, when you can get so far away from the original source that the dance becomes meaningless to the root. For example, when I see a Goth ATS dancer, I can APPRECIATE the art, but I don't see it as bellydance: neither the costuming, music or presentation is bellydance.. it is a unique American creation.. so the Goth dancer needs to understand the roots, understand why what she is doing ISN'T bellydance per se, then GIVE IT A NEW NAME and define it honestly to the audience. If I saw a "bellydance" show advertised, and was presented with a Goth program instead, I would be angry. Bellydance in and of itself has a connotation, a MEANING, a certain defined presentation.

Part Two next..

Ne-Kajira

continued...

A former student queried what I thought of her groups "bellydance" presentation at a bellydance event. This performance consisted of SOME bellydance movements performed in zoot suits & sunglasses with Greek folkdance steps & hip-hop.. I said she couldn't call it bellydance &
wondered why she was presenting it at a bellydance conference rather than seek out another venue. She eventually defined her company as doing "Dance Design". That's more honest. Don't get me wrong- I LOVE her choreography & dance presentation.. it's just not bellydance anymore.

In "The Bellydance Family Web" I traced the beginnings of raks sharqi from the past up to the present day.. in doing so, I had to admit that much of what's called "Belly-whatever" has moved so far away from the form that it's no longer recognizable as even being related to the root dances. This is fine- so long as we define what we do to ourselves, our students & the audiences & understand WHY we're combining things, HOW to combine things with some semblance of sense & WHAT we hope to create/achieve by doing so.

I love dance, dance theatre, the new styles, the old. But I still feel that if we fail to understand the roots of what we're doing- including their differences- we fail to do service to any.

Fusing dances isn't something we do "just because we can".. even an artist has a POINT to what they do. If we can't verbalize the point beyond "Because I want to", then the dancer has failed to grasp the purpose behind either dance & has failed to make a spiritual, physical, emotional or other connection between the two.

Art is the voice of freedom, but even freedom comes with responsibility. In dance, our responsibility is to be honest with ourselves, our students, our audience.. to define what we are doing, be able to explain WHY we are doing it and be able to explain the underlying connections between what we are fusing.. and to KNOW something about what we're fusing. In most "confusion bellydance", I watch a dancer throw in hip hop, African, pole dancing & ??? with her bellydance moves & I'm left wondering "What the heck was THAT?!" so the dancer has failed to make any connections between her fused dances to me, the audience.

I've heard "But the audience loved it". But they walked away saying "So THAT'S bellydance?" Was that an accurate picture of same?
And here's the interesting thing: a LOT of confusion dancers tell me they find bellydance "boring".. So, i it's "boring", rather than change a dance form beyond all recognition and dis-educate the public so they don't know the difference between bellydance and rev, why not define what you do- give it a new name- change the costuming- & find a new venue for the dance form you do?

Bottom line: defining what you do, advertising honestly, educating the public truthfully and presenting yourself with integrity

Ne-Kajira

Originally Posted by Ne-Kajira

Fusing dances isn't something we do "just because we can".. even an artist has a POINT to what they do. If we can't verbalize the point beyond "Because I want to", then the dancer has failed to grasp the purpose behind either dance & has failed to make a spiritual, physical, emotional or other connection between the two.

Ne-Kajira,
Very eloquently stated!!! I agree wholeheartedly with your points.

I would add that the fusion of ethnic dance forms borders on cultural appropriation when the dancer either fails to educate him/herself or blatantly disregards the original forms and the meaning they held/continue to hold among the cultures of origin.

Best wishes,
Nisaa

So what I'm getting from this is that you guys don't think Sonia did any research at all before she created her "Bellynesian" fusion piece. And...the BDSS show that it was featured in was innapropriately labeled leading the audience to be bamboozled into thinking they were seeing pureform belly dancing? (I'm asking this because that's not what I read in the program. It all looked pretty clearly defined to me.) Was the original thread question a "What if she was performing ritual polynesian dance out of context?" or was it "She was performing ritual polynesian dance out of context." ? The "What if" thing seems a pretty strange thing to get spun up about.

~*Genisis*~

Originally Posted by Genisis

So what I'm getting from this is that you guys don't think Sonia did any research at all before she created her "Bellynesian" fusion piece. And...the BDSS show that it was featured in was innapropriately labeled leading the audience to be bamboozled into thinking they were seeing pureform belly dancing?

Well, I don't happen to think any of the things you are attributing to "you guys". I actually do believe that Sonia had some training in Polynesian before creating her fusion, though I don't know how much. And I think the BDSS segment was properly labeled as being a fusion.

My primary objection to the fusion piece in the BDSS show was that I found it boring. But that's not an "ethics of fusion" issue, it's simply that the piece was not to my taste, just as krumping is not to my taste. Shrug.

Zari asked a question about the ethics of using of sacred music and dance in fusion, and I responded to her question. My response was on a general philosophical level and not a reaction to any particular performance I have seen, BDSS or otherwise.

I

I agree but Im sure Sonia has never in her life chanted and did a hula to worship the gods while bellydancing.

Of course not. That's not actually my point though. See, I can't speak for Hawaii but in other Polynesian cultures, all those cultural expressions, like language/reo, dance/haka, moko etc etc are intrinsically tied up with community identity whether they're specifically sacred, god-worshipping things or just something you do for fun. They're taonga, they're treasures. In other words, they belong to that community, and that community is, nine times out of ten, one that's been exploited to a greater or lesser extent by colonisers. SO, what we're trying to do nowadays is recognise the indigenous right to ownership of their things instead of just going "O HAI COOL" and grabbing them willy-nilly.

A very good example of this is how Maori managed to take Lego Bionicles to task a couple of years ago for creating a range of figures that just happened to use Maori terminology. Lego had to pay out. Whereas years back, non-Maori never even thought about whether or not it was OK to draw a random "Maori warrior" on a teatowel with a moko copied from a Goldie painting or an old photo. Today you will get the ancestors of said moko-wearer taking you to court because you've stolen their intellectual/spiritual/historical property. On the other hand, the historical use of Ka Mate by the All Blacks - even though it's offensive to some Maori not so much because it's "a" haka but because it's Te Rauparaha's haka, and if TR happened to slaughter your ancestors it's probably not much fun hearing his joyful rant about how great he is whenever you watch the rugby. And so now, even though Ka Mate is still used, the ABs have their own specially commissioned haka too.

This is why I sometimes get annoyed when people get snippy about Raqia's money-making strategies or a notion that Egyptian teachers are overpricing themselves etc. Why should they not make money from the dance form they are considered to have perfected, in the country where most ME people will acknowledge some of the best dance comes from? ME dance is a little harder to indigefy due to the multiple cultural influences over the centuries, but nonetheless we still call it ME dance, so ME people should surely get something out of its commercial form. (And incidentally I do believe absolutely and without question that raqs sharqi and so on and so forth are fusion dance forms in and of themselves. But that doesn't mean that there isn't a prior claim from that part of the world.)

Although I think the term "bellynesian" is kind of naff, if Sonia has done some proper study into hula and its traditions before fusing - and I have no doubt that she has - then it's fine and dandy. Whereas I don't feel comfortable with the idea of some random dancers sticking some leaves on their heads and leis around their necks and waving their hands around and calling it "hula fusion", if you get me.

Originally Posted by Genisis

It really doesn't change anything either. What I am saying is that it is going to happen upon exposure to outside stimuli whether anyone likes it or not. What makes Polynesian dance so special that it can escape the same religous and artistic hybridization that everybody else endures? The original spiritual dance continues to be performed in the traditional way and simultaneously there exists a new artistic expression of it that is not being billed as the real deal/original thing. It is not a spiritual ceremony that is being presented in a banal secular way. It is a few moves and a change in costuming used in a belly dance setting. So unless you think there is something inherently disrespectful about belly dancing I think it would be better to focus on the commonality and respect the fusion piece for finding the similarities between the cultures in a positive way.
~*Genisis*~

I have an artistic vision - taking aspects of a Catholic service - like those groovy robes the guys wear, add ME rhymths to the music, then mix shimmy, kneeling, crossing and kissing the dancer on each side.

Things change.

Originally Posted by toria_dances

I agree but Im sure Sonia has never in her life chanted and did a hula to worship the gods while bellydancing.

You've missed the point. You don't need to have used the explicitly religious part of the dance to be stomping over another's culture. I still remember a Maori woman who was extremely offended when a Pakeha woman sang a traditional Maori song in a singing group I was in. She consided it a Maori taonga which a non-Maori may have been privileged to learn but had no right to share with mundane others.

I'm not saying I agree with this position - just that it exists.

*smacks Kashmir's bottom*

Hi again..

I have to admit I'm new here, so I'm only responding to the current discussion on THIS page, which seemed fairly general in a lot of respects. So... I haven't said anything about an individual dancer or BDSS.

My point was an overview of the concept of fusing dance, and maybe even what constitutes "fusion".. I still say a dancer needs to know what she's doing and why, and somehow, create a point of connection between the dances she's fusing. AS a fusion dancer, I think I can speak with a bit of awareness on the subject :-)

I agree with the poster who said raks sharqi is a "fusion" over time, but I maintain that the FOCUS has been at least within related forms, or regionally similar forms. (And yes, I recognize the Russian and jazz influences)

I LIKE a lot of the new material, I just can't see it as bellydance or bellydance-related and to be honest, sometimes I don't get what the dancer is trying to say with her performance when I see bellydance/raks sharqi/American orientale combined with, say, pole dancing, hula, tap dance or hip hop..

By the way, Shira, thanks.. I'd reply privately but I haven't figured out how to do that yet LOL

Ne-Kajira

So your saying unless your of that culture you should not be doing ther dance? If thats the case alot of Bellydancer are stomping over another's culture.....

Originally Posted by kashmir

You've missed the point. You don't need to have used the explicitly religious part of the dance to be stomping over another's culture. I still remember a Maori woman who was extremely offended when a Pakeha woman sang a traditional Maori song in a singing group I was in. She consided it a Maori taonga which a non-Maori may have been privileged to learn but had no right to share with mundane others.

I'm not saying I agree with this position - just that it exists.

As always discussions of this sort on bhuz run the gambet from those that make assumptions that are incorrect to those who have very valid points to make. For those who have not yet seen the DVD it should be pointed out that Sonia went to Tahiti as part of the process of making it and spent time with the top Polyhnesian teachers there and in fact was invited to dance with the Grande Ballet of Tahiti while whe was there. She was serious about understanding the essence of the dance from actually being there and working with the dancers.
Meanwhile on the DVD there is a bonus feature of a lengthy interview with the leader/choreographer of the Grance Ballet where he explains the origions of the dance and the meaning they know about it. I think it is safe to say that he would be dismissive of most of the comments on this thread about religion and respect for tradition. If anything the dance seems to have had more of a political or social hierarchy significance than religious with women baring their brests and men their sex organs as a mark of respect for the chief. Apparently they showed this respect to the Europeans when they arrived which must have been quite a shock to the sailors after months on a sailing ship.
It was noted that in fact no one actually knows what the dance was artistically or its purpose for the simple reason that there were no written records to refer to and no one is alive today who was there before the Europeans arrived and changed everything. We can all surmise and assume but there are no facts in existance and that is the only fact.
What Sonia found in Tahiti were dancers who loved dance for the sake of it just as bellydancers love bellydance. They had no idea if they were dancing exactly like their ancestors had done nor did the worry about it. The dancers of the Grande Ballet were also interested in what Sonia had to offer and many came to her bellydance workshop there. There was cross pollination and mutural respect for two similar artforms among women (and men) who loved to dance as their passion in life. That is a good thing and is what should be celebrated by dancers everywhere no matter what discipline they follow.

I reread one of my earlier posts, and I don't know if I worded it right. What I meant to convey is that although I don't know Sonia very well, she seemed like the kind of person who has good intent. Just wanted to clarify that.

My original point in posting was simply that I saw an article in Gilded Serpent; it seemed to make a point worth talking about, which is that the author feels that liturgical dances need to be approached with respect, especially when said liturgical dance is something they are encountering as "new". I thought that was an interesting point. also, in the rebuttals I have seen to the GS article, a lot of the responses seemed to be kind of ignoring the spiritual angle. I think that there has been a fair amount of comparing apples to ornages, because the rebuttals tended to focus on fusion with non-religious polynesian forms.

that brought me to the second thing I asked, which is whether Soniia was even fusing the sacred dances or not. If Sonia is not fusing the specialized sacred dances, then maybe the article should have made a valid point without citing her work as an example. Since I haven't seen the DVD, I really don't know. I cna't imagine why, but it has to be the first BDSS video in history that is NOT on youtube... (Miles, if you want to send me a free copy that's fine too haha)

anyway, the article and its debates triggered some thoughts, and I was just curious to hear other people's take. I didn't mean to make anybody get defensive.

PS - argh! the phone rang and I hit submit instead of proofreading it. sorry for the abrupt tone towards the end, apparently, talking, thinking and typing all at once are beyond my abilities. It's all good. In the meanitme, I will focus on walking & chewing gum at the same time.

Originally Posted by toria_dances

So your saying unless your of that culture you should not be doing ther dance? If thats the case alot of Bellydancer are stomping over another's culture.....

No - I said some people/cultures find it offensive.