Thread: X-Posted:How different can tribal dance become before it isn't bellydance?

Hi everyone!
I know I am probably opening up a huge can of worms here, but well, it's something I've been thinking a lot about lately, and I'd like to her the opinions of others.
One of the things I love about bellydance is that it is so vast an art form. No matter how long one is involved with it, there is still more to explore. I've been bellydancing my whole life, and it seems I've only just begun to explore the art.
That being said . . . I believe that there is a difference between fusion, and a different art form altogether. The question I'd like to ask all of you is where do we draw the line between bellydance and something else entirely?
(Just as a note, personally I think that traditional ATS style is still very much bellydance, with similar music, costuming and movement vocabulary, but that is my opinion. When I mention differences between the two dances just remember I’m not talking about ATS)
Though I am not myself a tribal dancer, I enjoy dancing to tribal music, and I adore watching tribal style. To me, tribal has grown to such an extent, that I honestly believe that it has become a separate entity. And anyone who is familiar with tribal knows, there are as many styles of tribal as there are styles of bellydance! There is the general Rachel Bricey tribal fusion, urban tribal, vintage tribal, gothic tribal . . . Surely tribal can now be recognized as a multi-faceted art form in its own right. Are we even really doing tribal justice by continuing to call it bellydance? Tribal is so much more, so much different!
Of course, it has its roots based largely in bellydance. But now, hip hop, modern and fosse seem equal to bellydance in terms of influencing tribal dance.
Look at the subject from the public's perspective. They are often confused (and rightfully so, I think) that two such different things are somehow considered the same thing. Try it sometime. Ask someone who is not familiar with our culture what they think. Show them two videos of each dance style and ask if they think it's the same thing.
The thing we have to ask ourselves is does this help any of us? Should we blame them for being confused, or do we hold responsibility?
Everything about tribal dance seems different now. The music style doesn’t even contain middle eastern rhythms or instruments half of the time. The costuming utilizes completely different elements than bellydance. The movement vocabulary has a lot in common obviously, seeing as how it grew out of bellydance, but honestly I think that bellydance has more in common with Tahitian than with a lot of tribal movements these days.
My question for all of you is, do you think that modern tribal fusion can really be called bellydance, or should it just be called tribal dance?
Anyway, I’d love to hear everyone’s thoughts about this. I imagine this is going to inspire quite a long conversation, but let’s take the plunge!

Just think of what the word, 'Tribal' really means.

'pertaining to, or characteristic of a tribe:'

Definition of Tribe

'any aggregate of people united by ties of descent from a common ancestor, community of customs and traditions, adherence to the same leaders, etc.'

So at what point does this dance break from it's foundations and claim it's own ground? Or should it remain honest to where it came from? I personally feel Tribal indicates ethnic mishmash of fusion. That's the way it looks and feels for me. And I don't see anything wrong in that. It's a kind of Esperanto of ethnic dance.

I only have a moment to speak to this - about to walk out the door - many tribal fusion dancers express the same feelings but what to name the genre? To simply call it 'Tribal Dance' causes confusion with Native American dance.

Just a thought.

I like tribal dance, but since it's a fusion of styles itself, how can you have tribal fusion?

If it were up to me, I'd call it 'world fusion' and say 'it's a cousin to bellydance, like Flamenco.'

I've seen lots of fusion dancers get angry when someone says what they're doing isn't bellydance, but I contend that 'not bellydance' isn't an insult.

Lots of wonderful things aren't bellydance. Chocolate. Hugh Jackman. Creme Brulee. Blue Man Group. Electric guitars. Corvettes. The list goes on and on...

p.s. But this answer presupposes that 'bellydance' refers to Middle Eastern forms. I realize THAT is open to debate and the opposing viewpoint is that 'bellydance' refers to torso-driven dances and Middle Eastern dance is a sub-genre. I don't think that argument is valid, because none of us are calling Tahitian or Hawaiian or Sub-Sahara African dances 'bellydance.'

I have seen this particular message pop up in many places, including several times on tribe. Maybe it would be most useful for everybody here if Nefabit could post a summary of what has been said elsewhere?

Well, Rachel Brice and her dance company sort of coined that Tribal Fusion genre/name. I tend to believe that as the Indigo separated from its ATS/ITS foundations that became so popular in CA it was definitely a Tribal style dance form, though with much more fusion influences with dance vocabulary and costuming. Then came the soloing dancing within' that group. The Indigo and it's dancers spun off in the bellydance stardom with my generation of dancers and younger so suddenly every one was a tribal fusion dancer and soloing under this genre because no one else knew what to call it and their primary dance influeces were members of the Indigo.

I have to say that what the Indigo referred to themselves as Tribal Fusion dancers was very appropriate considering that they were not dancing ATS but still dancing within' their tribe, even while having their solo careers. I would think then that a dance company or troupe who mimics the style of the Indigo with fusion dance vocabulary would also be appropriately called Tribal Fusion as they are dancing within' their "tribe".

I also consider members of the Indigo to be belly dancers. However, I have wondered this about "Tribal Fusion" as a whole -- Is it still belly dance? Sometimes I am bored to death watching it because I don't see any belly dance any more. Costumes have become strange and downright skanky sometimes (I once saw a performance with girls dressed in naughty school girl outfits) and I see more hip-hop or jazz than shimmies and hip-drops. Most of the time, I feel like I'm just watching modern, lyrical dance and even though it might be good dancing, I feel robbed because I was expecting more belly dance.

I think soloist who learned/study/perform the Tribal Fusion style of dance need a new title of what to call themselves, but as far as troupes go..it's fine. Like Mira Betz for example. People call her Tribal Fusion. Her costuming has that modern style to it, but her dance vocabulary doesn't reflect it all that much and she is a soloist.

And please, can we get rid of the whole Vaudeville, circus thing? Can we bring some more ME/Oriental beats back into popular Tribal Fusion music groups?

Okay, that's my 2 cents.

The $64 thousand dollar query in the Westernized Bellydance world of the 21st century/ see "What IS Bellydance anyway??!" & "Is THIS Bellydance??!"
Keep the dialoque open! Keep questioning!

"Bellydance" is really a slang word for Middle Eastern and North African dancing. I think you could still call tribal and gothic "bellydance." But from what I have on hearsay, many Arabs do not like it when tribal and gothic call themselves Middle Eastern dancers. And I agree because while having Middle Eastern moves, much of it is so fused that the Middle Eastern "flavor" is lost in translations.

And also on hearsay, many Arabs (not all but many) refer to gothic dancing as "zombie dance" and not in a nice way. I like a lot of gothic dancers but I think they should redefine their art in a different text.

Not looking to start a fight, just IMHO and just what I hear as well.

Nefabit stimulated quite a lively discussion about it this in my tribe on tribe.net. For those who may be curious, here's the link: x-posted: How different can tribal da... - Belly Dancing - the Shira.net Tribe - tribe.net

Originally Posted by nefabit

Look at the subject from the public's perspective. They are often confused (and rightfully so, I think) that two such different things are somehow considered the same thing. Try it sometime. Ask someone who is not familiar with our culture what they think.

The public is, well, ignorant. It is equally valid to say that the public can't understand how Debke, Saidi Tahtib, Khaleeji Bedouin, and Turkish Rom dancing all ended up under the same umbrella as what Salome is doing with a sword balanced on her head at Mohammed's Falafel Hut on Friday nights--and that's assuming the public is THAT knowledgeable. They might still be basing their understanding of belly dance on something they saw on a rerun of "The Beverly Hillbillies" 30 years ago. A culturally informed audience, OTOH, would see those various Middle Eastern influences worked into the larger concept of "belly dance," and consequently, I defer to them for the definition. To me, the line is crossed when one of them looks at a performance and thinks, "Seriously...what was that? It was interesting to watch, but it wasn't anything that ever looked anything like 'our' dance." That still leaves plenty of room for interpretation. It's one thing to leave an audience thinking, "Huh. That was different. I've never seen anyone belly dance with a Wii console balanced on her head before," as opposed to, "I don't even know what that was." Sorry, folks, but the question, "And what are you supposed to be?" is best left for kids in homemade trick-or-treat outfits.

My question for all of you is, do you think that modern tribal fusion can really be called bellydance, or should it just be called tribal dance?

I don't have a problem with someone wanting to give that style a separate identity, and there's enough substance to it to categorize it as something different. Ballet and modern dance have overlap and independent conceptualizations. The name "ATS" isn't perfect, but it doesn't bother me that much. It kind of carries the thought that some Americans took a bunch of ethnic ideas and melded them into a new group identity, which is pretty much how that style started out.

[Continued...]

I don't really like the words "tribal dance" for the newer style, though. "Tribe" has that ethnic meaning that might have made sense when that new dance idea was budding in the San Francisco scene, but it really doesn't apply now to a group of women creating a fusion out of a bunch of wildly diverse cultural traditions for the sake of being artsy and different--that's more of a "creative sorority" than a "tribe." I figure somewhere out there, some Native American wants to do an interpretive dance about the scourge of substance abuse on reservations or how the US government tried to buy his people off with casinos, and he wants to do it by transforming his culture's traditional music and dance into something new, and he deserves to call what he's doing "contemporary tribal" or "tribal fusion" more than some belly dancer who's slinking around to an Einsturzende Neubauten song while dressed up like a French zombie prostitute does. (Mind you, I'm not saying Helga Noir De La Cooch or whatever she calls herself can't be great art or entertainment, only that she's strayed so far into the "interpretive" realm that she isn't really making a valid cultural representation anymore.)

Finding a name that accurately summarizes what that other offshoot of belly dance is, and a name that is catchy enough to stick is a good trick, though. It seems to be heavily connected to what is called "alternative" music, so would "World Alternative Fusion" work?

Originally Posted by kharis_UK

Just think of what the word, 'Tribal' really means.

'pertaining to, or characteristic of a tribe:'

Definition of Tribe

'any aggregate of people united by ties of descent from a common ancestor, community of customs and traditions, adherence to the same leaders, etc.'

So at what point does this dance break from it's foundations and claim it's own ground? Or should it remain honest to where it came from? I personally feel Tribal indicates ethnic mishmash of fusion. That's the way it looks and feels for me. And I don't see anything wrong in that. It's a kind of Esperanto of ethnic dance.

I am NOT a tribal style dancer, and I don't know that this is true, but I was told way back when that the "tribe" in tribal style refers to the group of dancers, rather than to the aesthetic. (i.e., the dancers with whom you rehearse your combos & cues are your tribe.) Can any old-school ATS dancers confirm/deny that?


As for the "what is and isnt' belly dance", we had a great big discussion about it back in February. A lot of really interesting points came up.

I put my take on where to draw the "belly dance" line into a diagram at:
http://www.bhuz.com/forum/350816-post128.html

This is not disrespect to tribal dancers. As has been previously mentioned, bellydance is the slang or Western term to describe a Middle Eastern, North African, Greek and Turkish dance form. With that being said, tribal fusion still being called bellydance begs the question of whether or not it has anything to do with the culture(s) from which bellydance came. The short answer to that question would be "no."

I study and perform Egyptian style. I can't speak for others but I have always looked at bellydance simply not as a "cool dance" that I just wanted to learn. I look at it in it's cultural context. Of course things evolve and new innovations always arise, but I try to remain true and respectful to the culture from which it came as much as possible. Perhaps that's me taking it too seriously. I don't know.

Again I don't mean to offend tribal/goth dancers, but when you take something from another culture and add elements to it that absolutely do not belong but still call it by the name that links it to that culture, to me it's disrespectful and I can see why Arabs may find tribal style being called "bellydance" offensive, especially goth bellydance.

Bellydance is a folk dance of Middle Eastern/North African peoples that has been around for thousands of years and incorporating goth lifestyle scenes and this dark and brooding attitude with dances movements of an ancient culture that's not even remotely related is just plain odd to me. You just can't separate bellydance from its culture. At least that's my opinion.

I think what happened with the tribal/goth dancers is that they saw bellydance, thought it was cool and wanted the moves but didn't want the culture and that culture's music that came along with that dance and decided to make it into something else because they could not or did not want to relate to or lean the culture from which bellydance came.

Now don't get me wrong. I totally appreciate some good tribal fusion but I totally think that it should NOT be called bellydance, because it's not.

I've done tribal and tribal/world fusion, though I'm mostly Egyptian-based in training. Firstly, I think it's rather limiting to ask about what is or is not belly dance with tribal in the query. The issue isn't tribal, per se, but fusion in general. There are other types of fusion that have nothing to do with tribal. Ballet-belly dance fusion, jazz fusion (with belly dance), that Polynesian thing BDSS does, Gothic, hoop fusion (seen hoop that is definitely not calling itself tribal nor uses tribal), etc. Where do we draw the proverbial line for those? And why aren't we questioning those as well, instead of singling out tribal/tribal fusion?

I think what happened with the tribal/goth dancers is that they saw bellydance, thought it was cool and wanted the moves but didn't want the culture and that culture's music that came along with that dance and decided to make it into something else because they could not or did not want to relate to or lean the culture from which bellydance came.

My guess is that some people wanted to include two sides of themselves in their dance, not that they didn't want the cultural aspects or the music. I know some Gothic dancers who are traditionally trained and enjoy doing a good shaabi.

Originally Posted by indigostars

My guess is that some people wanted to include two sides of themselves in their dance, not that they didn't want the cultural aspects or the music. I know some Gothic dancers who are traditionally trained and enjoy doing a good shaabi.

I think that may be true. But that's still taking someone else's culture, stripping it then calling it something else. Again I'm not knocking anyone, but I still see how this may be offensive to someone from the Middle East or North Africa.

I think a lot of this fusion stuff it just plain ridiculous and is becoming too over-the-top.

Originally Posted by jmdruadh

I am NOT a tribal style dancer, and I don't know that this is true, but I was told way back when that the "tribe" in tribal style refers to the group of dancers, rather than to the aesthetic. (i.e., the dancers with whom you rehearse your combos & cues are your tribe.) Can any old-school ATS dancers confirm/deny that?

As I recall from interviews with Carolena Nericcio, somebody else (Morocco, maybe?) coined the term in order to refer to the aesthetic of Bal Anat ("California Tribal"), and that term was later applied to Fat Chance Belly Dance. Based on that, I would guess that the meaning of "you dance with your tribe" was added after the name was there.

To Indigostars,

To further drive my point home, I often see many tribal dancers also include Bharatnatyam and Kathak steps in their performances. Many of the facial expressions or hand gestures of these dances are of religious significance.

When you take from other cultures not understanding the meaning of things, you leave yourself out there to make of fool of yourself. Bharatnatyam and Kathak are religious dances and many of the movements represent God or some aspect of God or are strung together to tell the story of Krishna or some other Hindu diety. Someone who doesn't take these things into account is being disrespectful in my opinion.

Ohhhhh...there are so many different ideas happening in this thread - where to start?!

Some time ago, Jane Archer (Gypsy Caravan alum) coined 'Neo-Tribal' I always liked it, but it didn't seem to catch on. It was meant to differentiate between ATS/ITS movements performed as a group versus used by a soloist. I wonder if it may be time to resurrect the term or if we've really gone beyond that by now?

One of the things that I've heard many a tribal fusion dancer complain about is the lack of identifiable Tribal vocabulary in the fusion piece (not even an Egyptian basic) I think new dancers gravitate to fusion because of the freedom to chose music outside the standard MED cannon - they are able (even encouraged) to use Western music which they feel more comfortable interpreting with their newly acquired MED movement repertoire. Problem is, it's not bellydance.

In my own explorations, the technique used for MED bleeds over into everything - truly I have a difficult time dancing any other way - so it is 'fused' into ever muscle fiber. Example: during a ballroom dance demo, I was praised for my Salsa dancing and chided on my disco 'There's no hips in Disco!' *sigh* and I really thought I had them under control LOL!

Originally Posted by nefabit

Surely tribal can now be recognized as a multi-faceted art form in its own right. Are we even really doing tribal justice by continuing to call it bellydance?

NO, we're not doing it justice.

The word "bellydance" is limiting. IN GENERAL, bellydancers don't pirouette, leap, dance with partners, dance to jazz, etc. If I want to perform a dance like this, I don't want to call it "bellydance" because that limits me and I don't like limits. BUT, I don't have a venue for this kind of dance. So I take it to a "bellydance" show. That's been the major problem with fusion all along, imnsho. The wrong venue.

When I hear the word "bellydance" I expect certain characteristics. If the performance doesn't have them, I get annoyed. Same with "Tribal" -- everybody who hears the word will automatically assume one visual image or the other: Carolena or Rachel. Too many people look at a labeled "tribal fusion" piece and say "where's the Tribal in it?"



My theory:

So-named TRIBAL-FUSION dance is the modern evolution of breakdancing.
It's where breakdancing has evolved.

If look at the history of funk and breakdancing, you can see what looks to me like a very natural progression to Tribal Fusion a la Indigo. The musical interpretation is even very similar.

whaddyathink?

Originally Posted by aziyade

My theory:

So-named TRIBAL-FUSION dance is the modern evolution of breakdancing.
It's where breakdancing has evolved.

If look at the history of funk and breakdancing, you can see what looks to me like a very natural progression to Tribal Fusion a la Indigo. The musical interpretation is even very similar.

whaddyathink?

One of my friends who is also a bellydancer refers to bellydance a la Indigo as breakdance-bellydance.

Originally Posted by saheli

To Indigostars,

To further drive my point home, I often see many tribal dancers also include Bharatnatyam and Kathak steps in their performances. Many of the facial expressions or hand gestures of these dances are of religious significance.

When you take from other cultures not understanding the meaning of things, you leave yourself out there to make of fool of yourself. Bharatnatyam and Kathak are religious dances and many of the movements represent God or some aspect of God or are strung together to tell the story of Krishna or some other Hindu diety. Someone who doesn't take these things into account is being disrespectful in my opinion.

I've seen non-tribal dancers incorporate classical Indian dance. I think it's kind of wrong to just target tribal for using these aspects, since I've seen Orientale fusion (nothing at all tribal) use mudras. Although I cannot think of specifics, I know I've heard of Bharatanatyam or Odissi (the forms I've studied) fusion, that has been well-received.The most important issue isn't that their fusing things, it's that they aren't mindfully, as my world fusion teacher would say, fusing. That comes with extra knowledge from longer study, not just like a a month of classes. I have issues with poorly executed, poorly thought out fusion. However, I don't think it's disrespectful at all when people who have the skills do make great connections. Sometimes those great connections happen from collaborations, sometimes people just make a connection.

The best example of good fusion I can think of is how my former teacher would do this Javanese head movement that's like a maya with a hip maya. It looks really beautiful. She seems to know about Javanese dance and I don't think it's particularly disrespectful towards Javanese people or Middle Easterners; it's a very seamless blend.

Originally Posted by indigostars

I've seen non-tribal dancers incorporate classical Indian dance. I think it's kind of wrong to just target tribal for using these aspects, since I've seen Orientale fusion (nothing at all tribal) use mudras. Although I cannot think of specifics, I know I've heard of Bharatanatyam or Odissi (the forms I've studied) fusion, that has been well-received.The most important issue isn't that their fusing things, it's that they aren't mindfully, as my world fusion teacher would say, fusing. That comes with extra knowledge from longer study, not just like a a month of classes. I have issues with poorly executed, poorly thought out fusion. However, I don't think it's disrespectful at all when people who have the skills do make great connections. Sometimes those great connections happen from collaborations, sometimes people just make a connection.

The best example of good fusion I can think of is how my former teacher would do this Javanese head movement that's like a maya with a hip maya. It looks really beautiful. She seems to know about Javanese dance and I don't think it's particularly disrespectful towards Javanese people or Middle Easterners; it's a very seamless blend.

I'm not picking on tribal dancers. It's just that in terms of what I have seen personally, I've only seen tribal dancers do this.

However, if I saw oriental-style dancers incorporating mudras into their dance routines, I'd think they look equally foolish, as mudras have specific religious meaning and has nothing to do with bellydance of any kind and has nothing to with the culture that relates to bellydance.

Middle Easterners are Christian, Jewish and Muslim and taking a Middle Eastern dance and fusing it Hindu religious hand gestures is just plain stupid. LOL!

Originally Posted by aziyade

My theory:

So-named TRIBAL-FUSION dance is the modern evolution of breakdancing.
It's where breakdancing has evolved.

If look at the history of funk and breakdancing, you can see what looks to me like a very natural progression to Tribal Fusion a la Indigo. The musical interpretation is even very similar.

whaddyathink?

Now we're talking... Some forms of funk & breakdancing, I used to look at & think "Hmm that looks like belly dances moves kinda chopped up & strung together"...which I now learned is called "strobing"...g.: [I admit it, I show off to my teen students by strobing snake arms, & going, look! hip-hop]

Trained in Orientale & Folkloric, I also love to be funky & experimental, ala strobing & weird music. I call these forays "Funky Expression" & include in my recitals as specialty numbers. I don't think of it as Bellydancing, but it does spring from the the Bellydance movements & steps in my repetoire of SITA ["Solo inspired torso articulation"-Andrea Deagon, dance scholar]. I see my experimentation more as "Modern Dance" than anything else. Breaking rules, exploring.
Mind you, I thoroughly dislike unskilled dancers hiding behind experimentation as much as anyone! If not more.p::
I do think doing Orientale dance & funky, for me, as exploring different sides of my dance expression. I think of Orientale in a cultural context, and try to be as educated as possible about it, and the funky experimental as an American offshoot of Modern Dance.

From my classical Indian dance studies, it's just religious meanings but meanings in general.

IIRC, the BDSS Bollywood piece used mudras for both the tribal and non-tribal dancers. My point about tribal not being the only issue fusion isn't really aimed at you, just general audience. I think the question is really when is any fusion dance not belly dance. The BDSS are an excellent source of fusion that isn't tribal, but there's smaller level fusions, like veil-poi, fans/fan veils, or those tea light candles.

Originally Posted by jmdruadh

I am NOT a tribal style dancer, and I don't know that this is true, but I was told way back when that the "tribe" in tribal style refers to the group of dancers, rather than to the aesthetic. (i.e., the dancers with whom you rehearse your combos & cues are your tribe.) Can any old-school ATS dancers confirm/deny that?

I'd heard that it went back to the old Bal Anat concept: that they were basically re-imagining themselves as a lost "tribe." In other words, they set out to represent a specific culture--it just happened to be one that was a product of their collective imagination, as opposed to an actual anthropological entity.

I put my take on where to draw the "belly dance" line into a diagram at:
http://www.bhuz.com/forum/350816-post128.html

I have some questions about your diagram, basically clarifications of what goes where. Do you want me to restart the old thread or start a new one?

Originally Posted by *Shira*

Nefabit stimulated quite a lively discussion about it this in my tribe on tribe.net. For those who may be curious, here's the link: x-posted: How different can tribal da... - Belly Dancing - the Shira.net Tribe - tribe.net

Per your list in the tribe.net thread,

* The music must be closely allied with the country the ethnic dance comes from. If it wasn't actually composed in the country of origin, it should at least sound as thought it *could* have been.

* The dancer should use energy in a way that is consistent with how the dance is presented in its countries of origin.

* The musical interpretation should be done in a way that is consistent with how dancers from the culture of origin might do it.

* The costuming should be compatible with the type of costuming worn for public performances of this dance in the culture of origin.

* The kind of stage persona presented by the dancer should be compatible with what you'd expect to see from a dancer in the country of origin.

* The movement vocabulary should be recognizable as something you might see in the country of origin.

* If props are used, they should be compatible with the culture from which the dance comes. Ie, they should be PLAUSIBLE as something you might expect to see people using in daily life, or recognizable as something that dancers in that culture are likely to perform with on a public stage.

Looking at points #2, 3, and 5, I'm thinking the verbiage might need to be massaged a bit to include some concept of "intentions" or "delusions." If you're going to demand rigorous adherence to each of those standards, I'm afraid you're going to have to eliminate at least half of the student dance population who think they're doing some form of traditional belly dance but aren't quite pulling it off due to inexperience or poor modeling on the part of their teachers. I can't honestly recall that I've ever been to a dance event where at least one performer didn't think she was doing "authentic Egyptian style," and just plain wasn't--particularly when it comes to subtleties like physical presentation (posture and gestures), energy manipulation, and musical interpretation. Those are the hardest parts of the dance to integrate in an organic and sincere way when you're not native to the culture, and a lot of performers, some of whom have considered themselves pros for years, still haven't mastered them.

Originally Posted by Lauren_

If it were up to me, I'd call it 'world fusion' and say 'it's a cousin to bellydance, like Flamenco.'

I've seen lots of fusion dancers get angry when someone says what they're doing isn't bellydance, but I contend that 'not bellydance' isn't an insult.

Lots of wonderful things aren't bellydance. Chocolate. Hugh Jackman. Creme Brulee. Blue Man Group. Electric guitars. Corvettes. The list goes on and on...

p.s. But this answer presupposes that 'bellydance' refers to Middle Eastern forms. I realize THAT is open to debate and the opposing viewpoint is that 'bellydance' refers to torso-driven dances and Middle Eastern dance is a sub-genre. I don't think that argument is valid, because none of us are calling Tahitian or Hawaiian or Sub-Sahara African dances 'bellydance.'

Really well put!

Originally Posted by steffib

I have seen this particular message pop up in many places, including several times on tribe. Maybe it would be most useful for everybody here if Nefabit could post a summary of what has been said elsewhere?

Ooh, I would love to if I could, but there are so many responses! The Shira tribe is where most of the conversation elsewhere is being held, and last I checked there were 44 responses the day I posted it. Most of it is rather touchy and borders arguing, but overall is doing pretty well.
I might be able to figure out how to copy and paste the entire thread, but I think it would end up getting garbled. :-/

I really like what is being pointed out here - that it is called tribal because you dance with your tribe.
So really, "tribal" would really only apply to ATS and similar styles.
But yes, indeed, what to call it if not tribal bellydance? It isn't Native American dance . . . really I consider it to be, overall (in regards to what is usually called tribal fusion) urban dance merged with ancient dance. Dunno what we would call that. :p

Nadira, I LOVE your diagram! Very well illustrated!

Originally Posted by indigostars

that Polynesian thing BDSS does, Gothic, hoop fusion (seen hoop that is definitely not calling itself tribal nor uses tribal), etc. Where do we draw the proverbial line for those? And why aren't we questioning those as well, instead of singling out tribal/tribal fusion?

Good point. The more I got to know Polynesian the more muddied up I saw it become with ME dancing. I think that fused dance though is referred to as "Bolyniesian." Whether you like it or not it still is a defined dance term.

And as far as using the word "tribal" that too is pretty generic and applies to a lot of people gathered together as a group doing the same thing. I really don't think it belongs to the Native American people nor do I think they feel that way either.