Technique vs. passion war

[Ahava_Melantha]

okay lately I have seen lots of arguments between which is more important; technique vs passion.

now in my opinion they are both EQUALLY important.

I have seen ppl with IMPECCABLE technique but didn't look like they were onto it, or they had this look like from Toy Story "are they gone yet, oh thank god" from Barbie for holding up a static smile.

I have also see some ppl who love what they're doing but aren't experience dancers or just aren't good at it "hey we all can't be good dancers right?, some of us have to be good drummers, good costume makers, etc".

so what are all your thoughts on this?

 

[Shanazel]

Passion without technique is sound and fury, signifying nothing.

Technique without passion is exercise.

 

[Ahava_Melantha]

shanazel you are too cute - technique without passion is exercise hehe

i will have to steal that from you - hope you don't mind

 

[Kashmir]

There is a third leg - musicality. You can have passion and technique - and still miss the boat.

But addressing you original question, it depends exactly what you mean by "technique". If you just mean clean, crisp movement then passion wins because you can have good belly dance that is not totally isolated. But if you mean inability to distinguish movements so everything looks like mush - I'll go with technique - otherwise it is like trying to talk without being able to pronounce any words.

There is a middle ground where you stick to the technique you can do well. That is, you don't need to be able to do everything. But what you show to the public uses what you can do well - and you do it with passion and musicality.

 

[Dunyah]

See the thread about Sonya and the clip of her vs. the clip of Nadia Gamal for an illustration of technique (Sonya) and passion (Nadia Gamal). Of course Nadia has technique, too, just not as perfect as Sonya's. But for me, her passion trumps the perfection.

 

[Aniseteph]

What Kashmir said. Passion with no technique is mush, technique with no passion is gymnastics. And without musicality it's not dancing, IMO.

I don't think any one is more important than the others, and there's nothing wrong with emphasising one over the others. But they all matter and if one is missing I get bored pretty fast.

 

[Sophia Maria]

Good question. I have a hard time balancing the two, sometimes. I either get too emotional, or I forget the emotion because I'm so absorbed in the technique.

Dancing is like speaking another language: there is technique (grammar and pronunciation) and there is inflection and accent, both equally important. You could speak perfectly, crisply, with impeccable pronunciation, but if you forget the inflection that different languages have or just sacrifice it for the sake of speaking "perfectly", you will speak like a robot. Without inflection there is no meaning beyond the literal grammar. But if you master the inflection and "feeling" of a language without mastering the technique.....you could sound like you were speaking French, but really you might be saying something horribly embarassing. :shok:

 

[Ahava_Melantha]

ahhh! I understand I have a few songs that I got quite involved with emotionally. to some I might not be dancing much, but thats because I have been taken with egyptian (less), so in that terms I geuss its a styling preferance. but I also haven't performed these dancers either

 

[Yame]

In the grand scheme of things, they are both equally important to a professional dancer.

To a student however, technique is the foundation of dance. If you keep building on top of something without a foundation, it's just going to fall apart.

Someone with all the passion and feeling in the world but no technique is never going to look good until they take the time to improve their technique, which takes years.

Someone with all the technique in the world but no feeling can much more easily work on that with performance experience and consciousness that this needs work.

There are also technical ways to improve stage presence and portray feelings on stage, so in a way, "passion" can be part of technique, as well. If that was not the case, actors would not take acting lessons for example.

 

[Dunyah]

Without both passion and technique, there is always going to be something missing in a performance. Any serious dancer, especially one who wants to perform, as a student or pro, should be constantly working on dance technique. Performing also has technique, like understanding your audience, being appropriate for your venue, selecting good music, putting together a good set-- and all that is before you even get on stage. Then there's audience contact, musicality and yes, some kind of "letting go" or "tarab" or passion in the performance that takes everything a step beyond the ordinary and makes a performance outstanding.

 

[shiradotnet]

I'd never really thought of "technique vs passion" as being a war. I believe that anybody who REALLY UNDERSTANDS dance (regardless of whether we're talking about ballet, belly dance, flamenco, or any other dance genre) would recognize that dance requires multiple skills in order to be a performer who stands out from the rest - technique and passion/emotion are among those skills, but other attributes (such as musicality) are needed too.

Famous ballerina Gelsey Kirkland wrote in her autobiography, "I danced with a passion to spite the music," which explains why she became the star of American Ballet Theater while others with equally perfect technique were relegated to the corps de ballet.

I suspect that those who debate the importance of technique vs passion are trying to justify why THEY PERSONALLY feel drawn to one or the other. Or, to market the workshops and DVD's they've created that emphasize one or the other. But in order to mature as a dancer and become a headliner, a performer must have BOTH. I personally try to introduce both ideas to my students even at the beginner level.

 

[AndreaSTL]

I agree that both are necessary, but given the option I will watch an enthusiastic beginner over a bored professional any day. While not technically perfect, the excitement and enthusiasm the beginner brings is more interesting to me than a pro who looks like they're making a grocery list.

 

[Bellydance Oz]

So many good posts but I think Aniseteph says it best so far:

"Passion with no technique is mush, technique with no passion is gymnastics. And without musicality it's not dancing, IMO."

I remember reading Agnes de Mille on ballet reviews, and she talked about how a performance is a total package with a number of ingredients, and critics who focus on just one aspect are failing in their craft. Same goes for the dancer, IMO.

Good technique is fundamental, you can't dance properly without it - but in most dance genres today, I'm seeing far too much emphasis on technique at the expense of passion and musicality. Watching ballet is starting to feel like watching gymnastics! If anything, belly dance goes too far the other way, with students being encouraged to perform too early which leads them to underestimate the importance of technique - but in some ways I prefer that.

 

[Tammyraks]

Both are important.

 

[Farasha Hanem]

I'd like to hear your views on why both are important.

 

[Tammyraks]

No passion, why even dance, yes like someone else metioned, just exercise. Which is not a bad thing.

Without good technique, no foundation for the dancer.

I have seen one or the other in a dancer.

I have seen dance teachers, who have the passion, but not good technique. While I admire there love/ passion for dance. It does not make a good dancer.

Then, I have seen dancers with just technique, which could equal boring.

So having both is a must, at least in my opinion. But what do I know, I no longer dance.

I'd like to hear your views on why both are important.

 

[teela]

I believe you need equal parts of passion, technique and musicality. All three items will bring a piece of music alive and engage your audience so they are involved rather than feeling as if they are on the outside looking in.

 

[AyaKara]

I feel like passion without technique means that you technically aren't dancing, just moving your body around in an exciting/ powerful way in hopes that it looks right.

Technique without passion . . . sort of just sounds like someone performing moves robotically.

Both are necessary in belly dance!

 

[Tammyraks]

Yes, without music there is no dance.

I believe you need equal parts of passion, technique and musicality. All three items will bring a piece of music alive and engage your audience so they are involved rather than feeling as if they are on the outside looking in.