Andrea Deagon
New member
A'isha --
Judging from your last post, apparently I've misunderstood you, since apparently we agree on almost everything about the broader dance culture in the time leading up to the early 20th century.
To recap: That potentially and in some manifestations at least it involved: complexity in movement; subtle interpretation of complex music; expression of feminine essence (at least in cases where the performer was female or sufficiently transgendered); aesthetics like those described by al Faruqi; desire to create tarab in audiences; emphasis on soloists in some cases; to some extent and in some cases urban locale; probably rarely (though this needs more elaboration with archival research by someone, not likely to be me) adaptation or adoption of Western dress for elite audiences.
What it did not include was ballroom dance steps, Westernized techniques in other areas such as use of the arms, use of proscenium stages in a way that evolved primarily in Western theater, bra and belt costumes (except in the case of some Eastern performers in the 1900's thru 1920's who performed primarily in the West), and accoutrements like veils (again, except for some Eastern performers who mainly worked in the West).
This is certainly enough to qualify it as a new style, and I do regard raqs sharqi as a specific art that was created in the early 20th century.
My emphasis on the phenomenon, though, is the permeabiliy of its borders, and the presence of most of its key elements as realities or potentials in the underlying dance culture that existed before it and exists alongside it and is affected by it and provided the base for it. To revert to an earlier metaphor, it interests me that almost all of the elements that make crimson special are included in the definition of red, while you are most concerned to identify red as a specific phenomenon (which of course it is). I think we spend a lot of time arguing over quibbles, which would be pathetic except that it's also so educational. I always learn a lot in these discussions, and it's very helpful to hash through all of these ideas.
Judging from your last post, apparently I've misunderstood you, since apparently we agree on almost everything about the broader dance culture in the time leading up to the early 20th century.
To recap: That potentially and in some manifestations at least it involved: complexity in movement; subtle interpretation of complex music; expression of feminine essence (at least in cases where the performer was female or sufficiently transgendered); aesthetics like those described by al Faruqi; desire to create tarab in audiences; emphasis on soloists in some cases; to some extent and in some cases urban locale; probably rarely (though this needs more elaboration with archival research by someone, not likely to be me) adaptation or adoption of Western dress for elite audiences.
What it did not include was ballroom dance steps, Westernized techniques in other areas such as use of the arms, use of proscenium stages in a way that evolved primarily in Western theater, bra and belt costumes (except in the case of some Eastern performers in the 1900's thru 1920's who performed primarily in the West), and accoutrements like veils (again, except for some Eastern performers who mainly worked in the West).
This is certainly enough to qualify it as a new style, and I do regard raqs sharqi as a specific art that was created in the early 20th century.
My emphasis on the phenomenon, though, is the permeabiliy of its borders, and the presence of most of its key elements as realities or potentials in the underlying dance culture that existed before it and exists alongside it and is affected by it and provided the base for it. To revert to an earlier metaphor, it interests me that almost all of the elements that make crimson special are included in the definition of red, while you are most concerned to identify red as a specific phenomenon (which of course it is). I think we spend a lot of time arguing over quibbles, which would be pathetic except that it's also so educational. I always learn a lot in these discussions, and it's very helpful to hash through all of these ideas.