BellaBohemian
New member
I was curious about this because I've seen several burlesque fusion dancers defend it on the grounds that "it's not stripping". But when I look into it, I've yet to find any evidence that burlesque was that different in the olden days.
Burlesque may not be about stripping right down to the buff, but hasn't it always been about taking your clothes off?
"Burlesque is a literary, dramatic or musical work intended to cause laughter by caricaturing the manner or spirit of serious works, or by ludicrous treatment of their subjects. The word derives from the Italian burlesco, which itself derives from the Italian burla – a joke, ridicule or mockery"
~Wiki
Burlesque started off more wholesome then it is today. It made a slow and gradual change for some acts to include a striptease towards the 1930's-40's in America. Since that version of Burlesque is all we really see now, most people hear Burlesque and think it's a fancy name for a stripper. Or a stripper who gets paid more.
A lot (if not all) the Burlesque night clubs in Los Vegas are done with stripping. But they include a more "showy" performance. Rather then one girl going on stage to one song of her choice and doing a sexy dance whilst removing clothes; a Burlesque show will often include more then one girl on stage (or even use several small stages in sync) and the act contains song and dance or some form of a comedy act.
Some of those acts do not let the performer be completely nude, they will wear large nipple coverings and stockings with garter belts and fancy underwear, no less.
Honestly when I think of the original form of Burlesque in a more modern setting I think of the last dance they do in the movie Chicago. It's showy, flashy and they even mock themselves with the Tommy guns. Makes the audience laugh a little, but you still get your song, dance and pretty ladies. :dance: