Thread: Beneficial to start with ATS before fusion?

Hi there,
I would be very grateful to read about your experiences in tribal;)

One of my students wants to start with tribal after some years of folkloric&cabaret-
would you with experience of tribal say that it´s beneficial for her dancing to start out with ATS?

I know that the ATS(and fusion) dance teachers I´m sending her to starts out with zils almost from first class when learning ATS;and to me that sounds good because I have never taught fingercymbals OR floorwork,so in those techniques she will start from scratch.

When I try to find serious teachers in tribal,those who teach tribal styles I´m not familiar with(think steampunk,poi or cirkus burlesque involved)almost never seem to teach or even have a background in ATS.


Signed,
Confused Cairocentric

im not really sure. i guess it depends on what the student wants to get out of it. i didnt start with ats i started w fusion (deff need to find a good teacher tho) and i personally would maybe take an ats class or two for some posture and arm training but its not my cup o tea personally.

like i said it depending on what the student wants to learn and both styles have merit and cross over a bit.

disclaimer, I do not consider myself a tribal dancer, although I have taken classes in various tribal genres.

I think ATS is a good foundation for tribal style, but the other items you mentioned (poi, cirque, burlesque) are more fusion genres. I love poi, but poi with belly dance IS a fusion form- and anyone who wants to learn really should know the foundations, IMO. So yes, find out what she actually wants to do! For some, tribal means a pseudo-folkloric conglomeration of styles. For some, it means ATS & it's offshoots, for some it is covers various forms of fusion, or all of the above!

I think I would lean towards the ATS teacher personally, but my biggest concern is simply knowing that the teacher of any given genre is knowledgeable about teaching, physiology and the technique, history & provenance of their chosen genre and how it integrates into the broader dance world.

I started out and still am a classical Oriental dancer. I started training in ATS with teachers that all studied with FatChance Belly Dance and Sister Studios two years ago and wouldn't dream of doing Tribal Fusion without a solid foundation in ATS. I've seen a lot of "tribal fusion" dancers out there without a background in ATS and it just doesn't look right whether it's the posture or some of the ATS derived movements.

Just as we would encourage those who want to be "fusion" bellydancers to start with a good basis in Middle Eastern dance, so would I encourage one who wants to explore "tribal fusion" to get a good basis in ATS. It is impossible to fuse well without understanding the dance styles you are fusing.

She should start with a tribal and not a tribal fusion teacher, in my opinion. I don't think it makes sense for a student to explore tribal fusion without studying tribal by itself. It is the base of tribal fusion, after all.

Question -- I'm in the same situation as your student. Would you all recommend Fat Chance BEFORE Gypsy Caravan or Kajira, or will any of the 3 give you the experience of learning the "Tribal" part ?

I think it depends on what she's really ultimately looking for. If it's true "tribal" fusion then yes a good understand on ATS is beneficial. What is she hoping to fuse with tribal? She should explore the dance forms she is hoping to fuse. I have seen lots of fusion that is no way rooted in tribal and if this is the case she should explore the forms she is looking to mix and not just study the mixture.

Most of the ITS dancers that students yearn to emulate started out with a foundation in tribal belly dance: Bal-Anat-style tribal and/or ATS. Has she read this article, which talks about the need to have a solid understanding of what "tribal" means before you can start fusing other elements into it?
http://www.gildedserpent.com/cms/201...n-jill-parker/

Originally Posted by aziyade

Question -- I'm in the same situation as your student. Would you all recommend Fat Chance BEFORE Gypsy Caravan or Kajira, or will any of the 3 give you the experience of learning the "Tribal" part ?

This is my opinion, but I say start with the source. In this case, I think of FCBD as the source. Start wtih Carolena.

Originally Posted by MakedaMaysa

Just as we would encourage those who want to be "fusion" bellydancers to start with a good basis in Middle Eastern dance, so would I encourage one who wants to explore "tribal fusion" to get a good basis in ATS. It is impossible to fuse well without understanding the dance styles you are fusing.

Exactly. You need a good base to fuse from. If you have an excellent teacher they could guide straight into fusion but the student would be unaware of the boundries and would be unable to create their own fusion pieces. (Yes, they could produce new dance - but it may not be "fusion" - ie the bellydance or tribal might be missing and they could be unaware of it)

Originally Posted by _Tanya_

What is she hoping to fuse with tribal? She should explore the dance forms she is hoping to fuse. I have seen lots of fusion that is no way rooted in tribal and if this is the case she should explore the forms she is looking to mix and not just study the mixture.

This is exactly what I think too.

Originally Posted by Tourbeau

Has she read this article, which talks about the need to have a solid understanding of what "tribal" means before you can start fusing other elements into it?
http://www.gildedserpent.com/cms/201...n-jill-parker/

Already sent it to her,I had this saved in my "favorites"!I think it´s great.

Originally Posted by kashmir

Exactly. You need a good base to fuse from. If you have an excellent teacher they could guide straight into fusion but the student would be unaware of the boundries and would be unable to create their own fusion pieces.

Yes-I want her to have the best base possible for her dance development!

The teacher that was my first(and imo best)option for her is trained in cab,hilal,ats,fusion and started the first tribal group here.(trained by Carolena Nericcio in ATS)
She has been my only tribal teacher-and after trying to research the tribal scene here I think she´s my Obi Wan;)

Originally Posted by marsbar

I started out and still am a classical Oriental dancer. I started training in ATS with teachers that all studied with FatChance Belly Dance and Sister Studios two years ago and wouldn't dream of doing Tribal Fusion without a solid foundation in ATS. I've seen a lot of "tribal fusion" dancers out there without a background in ATS and it just doesn't look right whether it's the posture or some of the ATS derived movements.

After seeing how *extremely good*IMHO british Samantha Emanuel is in teaching&performing,I asked about her background.
She´s an autodidact who later got a FCBD certification+joined the tribal BDSS...
she is one of the most "complete"dancers I´ve seen.

Originally Posted by MakedaMaysa

Just as we would encourage those who want to be "fusion" bellydancers to start with a good basis in Middle Eastern dance, so would I encourage one who wants to explore "tribal fusion" to get a good basis in ATS. It is impossible to fuse well without understanding the dance styles you are fusing.

Originally Posted by indigostars

She should start with a tribal and not a tribal fusion teacher, in my opinion. I don't think it makes sense for a student to explore tribal fusion without studying tribal by itself. It is the base of tribal fusion, after all.

Yes-even though I feel very "out of the loop"with current tribal styles...I have a kind of "backbone"feeling that I want to direct her to "the source" first.
I have only trained a little ATS but that was like 10 years ago!


Maybe OT:
my own focus has been egyptian(+ other arabic)styles;
I rather have deeper knowledge and better education&training in fewer styles than have a broad but more shallow in many.
(although I dabble in turkish&persian also,being an enthusiastic student)

Sent the link to this discussion to her so she can read about your opinions&experiences here-THANK YOU ALL!

<3
Emma

This is one of my big soapbox issues...

I don't think anyone can rightly call themselves a "tribal fusion" dancer without having a foundation in ATS (FCBD, GC, BSBD, or others from that lineage) AND knowledge of the Jamila Salimpour format. I don't expect dancers to be a MASTER of both (that takes YEARS), but those, to me, are the fundamental roots of what we call "tribal" today. Personally, I've chosen the Jamila Salimpour format and FCBD ATS a as my tribal foundations, because without Jamila, the fundamental steps wouldn't have evolved into the basic steps in ATS, and without FC, there would be no ATS as we know it.

Friends of mine, however, in the East Coast tribal scene argue that the fantasy folkloric of Pennsic and the SCA is enough to be considered "tribal fusion". Personally, I disagree. I think that the SCA kind of belly dance is more of a fauxloric style of belly dance than tribal fusion.

::stepping down from soapbox::

Originally Posted by kiaroskuro

I don't think anyone can rightly call themselves a "tribal fusion" dancer without having a foundation in ATS (FCBD, GC, BSBD, or others from that lineage) AND knowledge of the Jamila Salimpour format. I don't expect dancers to be a MASTER of both (that takes YEARS), but those, to me, are the fundamental roots of what we call "tribal" today. Personally, I've chosen the Jamila Salimpour format and FCBD ATS a as my tribal foundations, because without Jamila, the fundamental steps wouldn't have evolved into the basic steps in ATS, and without FC, there would be no ATS as we know it.

Friends of mine, however, in the East Coast tribal scene argue that the fantasy folkloric of Pennsic and the SCA is enough to be considered "tribal fusion". Personally, I disagree. I think that the SCA kind of belly dance is more of a fauxloric style of belly dance than tribal fusion.

Doesn't this depend on how you define "tribal fusion"? If you are thinking "Rachel Brice," then that does imply a solid foundation in Salimpour and ATS, but if you are imagining your group as the next Bal Anat or Hahbi 'Ru (as in "faux ethnic lost tribe"), I would assume Salimpour would give you most of what you needed, and ATS would be a sister branch on the tree, not part of your trunk.

Originally Posted by Tourbeau

Doesn't this depend on how you define "tribal fusion"? If you are thinking "Rachel Brice," then that does imply a solid foundation in Salimpour and ATS, but if you are imagining your group as the next Bal Anat or Hahbi 'Ru (as in "faux ethnic lost tribe"), I would assume Salimpour would give you most of what you needed, and ATS would be a sister branch on the tree, not part of your trunk.

I think what I said applies even to those who don't necessarily do "Rachel Brice"-style tribal fusion. Without Jamila or FCBD, there wouldn't really be the term "tribal" as we know it today. I mean, if you're not dancing with a base in either of those two formats, what about it is "tribal"? (UNLESS, of course, one is using ACTUAL tribal folkloric dances and fusing them with modern belly dance and other dance forms, but that, in my mind, is "folkloric fusion".) One could say that I started off in that RB vein of dancing, but I actually feel that what I'm doing NOW is way more based in tribal style (FCBD and Jamila) than what I was doing 4 years ago because I'm more immersed in the study of those two schools.

What I really can't stand is when my peers use the term "tribal" to describe any sort of belly dance they see that isn't oriental, classic, or folkloric belly dance. "Tribal" is a term for a certain kind of belly dance, NOT a term for everything else that just doesn't fit under what we would call raqs sharqi, oryantal, or folk dance. I saw this happening on the recent "Project Belly Dance" episodes, and it really frustrated me.

I swear I'm gonna step off this soapbox. :D

Originally Posted by kiaroskuro

(UNLESS, of course, one is using ACTUAL tribal folkloric dances and fusing them with modern belly dance and other dance forms, but that, in my mind, is "folkloric fusion".)

But wasn't that the basis for Bal Anat? To take actual ethic dances, filter them through (what was then) the contemporary, multi-ethnic (nightclub) dance scene, and re-contextualize themselves as a "band of traveling performers" who did those fusions?

What I really can't stand is when my peers use the term "tribal" to describe any sort of belly dance they see that isn't oriental, classic, or folkloric belly dance. "Tribal" is a term for a certain kind of belly dance, NOT a term for everything else that just doesn't fit under what we would call raqs sharqi, oryantal, or folk dance. I saw this happening on the recent "Project Belly Dance" episodes, and it really frustrated me.

I'll agree there can be a tendency to divide the dance world into ME purists/traditionalists/academics versus "Anything Goes"/"Don't Cramp My Artistic Vision," with the various forms of tribal falling in the latter camp. Tribal does have its own standards and styles that deserve scholarly recognition, but, unfortunately, when part of your base is in the tribal camp because they felt constricted by the rules and effort demanded on the ME traditionalist side, it isn't surprising that they're not in a rush to bust a hump working on learning tribal history and technique, either. I'm not saying that all tribal dancers are this way (neither ATS nor ITS, because there are a lot of really dedicated, creative tribal dancers out there, and some people go into those styles because they genuinely prefer elements of their aesthetics), but sometimes I do get the impression that students switch from traditionalist to tribal because they have the mistaken impression that tribal is less work and they can just make stuff up. After all, if you go into Egyptian style, there's always the risk some Egyptian in the audience could criticize you for how well you don't do their dance, but who's got the authority to judge you on dancing like a Victorian zombie wind-up doll to techno music?

Originally Posted by Tourbeau

But wasn't that the basis for Bal Anat? To take actual ethic dances, filter them through (what was then) the contemporary, multi-ethnic (nightclub) dance scene, and re-contextualize themselves as a "band of traveling performers" who did those fusions?

True, but, personally, I wouldn't call Bal Anat "tribal fusion". That's just me, though. To me, "tribal fusion" is a recent phenomenon, from the mid-1990s and later.

Originally Posted by Tourbeau

...but sometimes I do get the impression that students switch from traditionalist to tribal because they have the mistaken impression that tribal is less work and they can just make stuff up. After all, if you go into Egyptian style, there's always the risk some Egyptian in the audience could criticize you for how well you don't do their dance, but who's got the authority to judge you on dancing like a Victorian zombie wind-up doll to techno music?

Oh, yes, there are CERTAINLY those dancers out there, and they give those of us who actually CARE about the history, lineage, and technique of tribal style belly dance a bad name! I've been brewing a blog post about this very issue. The mediocrity of the tribal fusion scene is something that really irks me. I aim high, and I love belly dance as a Middle Eastern dance form, but many of my peers don't seem to be able to say the same. (There, I said it!) But there are those of us who DO care and write on forums such as this one, like Shay Moore, Valizan, and others, so I'm not alone! :D

Originally Posted by kiaroskuro

Oh, yes, there are CERTAINLY those dancers out there, and they give those of us who actually CARE about the history, lineage, and technique of tribal style belly dance a bad name! I've been brewing a blog post about this very issue. The mediocrity of the tribal fusion scene is something that really irks me. I aim high, and I love belly dance as a Middle Eastern dance form, but many of my peers don't seem to be able to say the same.

Do it,do it,DOOO IIIT!pretty please...

Since I don´t know the current scene well;
I´m like an average joe looking at an ordinary bellydance show.
...mayby not,but I can´t surely separate styles,only(from a cab perspective)look at presence,posture,technique etc


Since the "Rachel Brice-fan girl-craze" I have seen about 2 million copies(some good,some bad)of her;there are imo too few who are using the foundations-
in many cases the creators of the systems can be reached for classes,workshops and feedback.

Originally Posted by Tourbeau

I'll agree there can be a tendency to divide the dance world into ME purists/traditionalists/academics versus "Anything Goes"/"Don't Cramp My Artistic Vision," with the various forms of tribal falling in the latter camp.

Yes, this is true except perhaps the last line.

I have a few friends in the 'pure' ATS camp.
We make fun out of each other and enjoy the banter, but what we do know is we have alot in common in terms of how we think and approach our styles...in this way we are exactly the same.
What I came realise, is that people who know their ATS are very keen to have their dance understood and labelled correctly.

, but sometimes I do get the impression that students switch from traditionalist to tribal because they have the mistaken impression that tribal is less work and they can just make stuff up. After all, if you go into Egyptian style, there's always the risk some Egyptian in the audience could criticize you for how well you don't do their dance, but who's got the authority to judge you on dancing like a Victorian zombie wind-up doll to techno music?

at the last line.. and YES!

Who has the authority?? good question... I guess the person who thinks that this sort of dance fits the bill at a belly dance festival and all the mugs who pay to watch?

Originally Posted by caroline_afifi

Originally Posted by Tourbeau
I'll agree there can be a tendency to divide the dance world into ME purists/traditionalists/academics versus "Anything Goes"/"Don't Cramp My Artistic Vision," with the various forms of tribal falling in the latter camp.

Yes, this is true except perhaps the last line.

I have a few friends in the 'pure' ATS camp.
We make fun out of each other and enjoy the banter, but what we do know is we have alot in common in terms of how we think and approach our styles...in this way we are exactly the same.

I was just speaking of the "us vs. them" mentality. Sometimes traditionalists like to portray fusionists as self indulgent and careless, and fusionists like to portray traditionalists as anal-retentive buzzkills who shun creative evolution. Admittedly, each camp has at least a few dancers entrenched at each end of the spectrum, in addition to a centrist band who are well grounded in the history and methodology of their style, and who are dedicated to doing meaningful work as artists and entertainers. Plenty of dancers enjoy studying and performing multiple styles, too, and don't want to live in a world where it's "one or the other."

Well Tourbeau lays out the issues really well - the main being, it occurs to me, since when is "fusion" necessarily "tribal" at all?

If you're doing "tribal fusion," then yes, ATS makes sense but if you are doing Spanish fusion or some fusion with modern dance or ballet then ATS wouldn't necessarily make sense at all?

Originally Posted by Elibelinde

Well Tourbeau lays out the issues really well - the main being, it occurs to me, since when is "fusion" necessarily "tribal" at all?

If you're doing "tribal fusion," then yes, ATS makes sense but if you are doing Spanish fusion or some fusion with modern dance or ballet then ATS wouldn't necessarily make sense at all?

Maybe I´m unclear in my post;what I meant was that my student is interested in tribal styles,and I wanted input wether it would be wise to start out with ATS before starting tribal fusion:)

No it wouldn´t make much sense to sign up for an ATS term if one wants to fuse cabaret with flamenco,for example!

on the whole us vs them camp some of us are in the middle camp. i love my Egyptian style camp but i also love tribal fusion style which is why i enjoy studying both. my tribal fusion teacher does go over some of the history and does incorporate some ats styled moves. and while i enjoy tribal fusion im not part of the anything goes just cuz its called fusion camp....there is a lot lot lot of bad fusion that shouldnt have the words belly dance attached to it.

Originally Posted by Callistaangel

on the whole us vs them camp some of us are in the middle camp. i love my Egyptian style camp but i also love tribal fusion style which is why i enjoy studying both. my tribal fusion teacher does go over some of the history and does incorporate some ats styled moves. and while i enjoy tribal fusion im not part of the anything goes just cuz its called fusion camp....there is a lot lot lot of bad fusion that shouldnt have the words belly dance attached to it.

I've pitched a tent in the same camp. I love both and study both.

As to the original question, I'd say a lot depends on the teacher. In my case, I did not start with ATS before studying tribal fusion. There would have been no way for me to do that here, anyhow. (I did start with Egyptian/cabaret style, however.) But, anyway, I happen to have a tribal fusion instructor who is well-versed in ATS, tells us the background of what she teaches us, is respectful of what moves are considered immodest in bellydance and teaches us about this, and is a far bigger stickler for drilling and technique than any of my Egyptian/Cab style instructors have been.

So, I'd say that it is possible to start with a tribal fusion instructor and be able to get a good grounding in tribal style and understand what you are fusing. What I don't know is how you can know this for sure before selecting the teachers. I guess you could talk to them and ask questions. If they say their introductory classes give you a grounding in ATS style, for instance, that could be a good sign.

Having started bassackward... I would say it would be more helpful to have a base in traditional oriental dance as it were... THEN study ATS... and then work on fusions.

I realized 3 years ago- after working with a two seperate tribal fusion improv groups (NOT ATS) as my first start in real classes and watching tons of video's, even the greatest tribal/fusion do your own thing dancers had a base in what I would consider traditional bellydance. THEN most of them worked with ATS... then did their own thing.

So after I moved- I began actively trying to train in a more traditional sense- I still take workshops from people I admire and love- who are far from traditional- but found/learned two things- one how I started did not set me up to succeed at all and also that I am a much more competent dancer NOW than I was by purposefully setting out to learn a more traditional dance- even if I don't enjoy dancing it AS MUCH.

I was really inspired by the fact the lovely Asharah (... yeah- too much rock for just one H) is a former student of my current studio. She started with Kim and evolved into to awesomesauce she is today.

I really saw and currently reap the benefits of being trained in the Suhaila format- which isn't about stylization- its about good dance basics and being able to actually do certain things and THEN stylilze them as you want.

But its impossible to stylize something you actually don't have an education on or in.. in this case dancing.

my not so humble opinon

You know I hadn't realized - and please correct me if I am wrong - that tribal and ATS aren't necessarily the same thing?

Originally Posted by Elibelinde

You know I hadn't realized - and please correct me if I am wrong - that tribal and ATS aren't necessarily the same thing?

I guess I think of tribal as being an evolution of three schools of thought

1. Proto-Tribal, dancing that adopted an aesthetic of fakeloric/faux ethnic tribes with varying degrees of authenticity and fusion, mostly limited to cultures of the Middle East and Silk Road.

2. American Tribal Style, dancing that converted the style of School 1 into a cued improv model, where each "tribe" maintained a library of highly stylized moves that were assembled to music spontaneously during performance.

3. Modern Tribal Style, dancing that took the ATS movement vocabulary away from the group improv format, into a solo or troupe presentation that may or may not be formally choreographed. Pretty much anything that a dancer wanted to fuse into her performance became fair game here.

Obviously, a dancer could be School 1 without training in 2 or 3 because it was the forerunner of the other two, although it's helpful to have experience in the others in the name of well-roundedness. One could argue that a competent dancer in School 2 or 3 should have extensive training in styles that precede it, but I think this is becoming less and less the case. Anecdotally, I feel School 3 is now the biggest faction, with 2 a smaller second and 1 barely still registering. (Other than Hahbi 'Ru, who still does 1? Maybe Aida al Adawi's troupe? Is anybody doing this style who wasn't in Bal Anat?) If you are serious about School 2, I think you cover a substantial portion of 1's core material as part of your education, but there are now 3's who have become unmoored from the other two. In some "tribes," fusion has overtaken tradition as the dominant element.

Originally Posted by Tourbeau

I guess I think of tribal as being an evolution of three schools of thought

1. Proto-Tribal, dancing that adopted an aesthetic of fakeloric/faux ethnic tribes with varying degrees of authenticity and fusion, mostly limited to cultures of the Middle East and Silk Road.

2. American Tribal Style, dancing that converted the style of School 1 into a cued improv model, where each "tribe" maintained a library of highly stylized moves that were assembled to music spontaneously during performance.

3. Modern Tribal Style, dancing that took the ATS movement vocabulary away from the group improv format, into a solo or troupe presentation that may or may not be formally choreographed. Pretty much anything that a dancer wanted to fuse into her performance became fair game here.

Obviously, a dancer could be School 1 without training in 2 or 3 because it was the forerunner of the other two, although it's helpful to have experience in the others in the name of well-roundedness. One could argue that a competent dancer in School 2 or 3 should have extensive training in styles that precede it, but I think this is becoming less and less the case. Anecdotally, I feel School 3 is now the biggest faction, with 2 a smaller second and 1 barely still registering. (Other than Hahbi 'Ru, who still does 1? Maybe Aida al Adawi's troupe? Is anybody doing this style who wasn't in Bal Anat?) If you are serious about School 2, I think you cover a substantial portion of 1's core material as part of your education, but there are now 3's who have become unmoored from the other two. In some "tribes," fusion has overtaken tradition as the dominant element.

Thank you - this is helpful -

Having "retired" for awhile and then starting to dance/teach again a few years ago it was like Rip Van Winkle - total confusion - I'm still trying to get it straight!

It's interesting to me that a relatively new style has already got a "modern" form.

In a way this strikes me as somewhat similar to modern painting - all of a sudden there was a break from tradition and a zillion new styles emerged -