Too much technique? What is it?

Amanda (was Aziyade)

Well-known member
I have seen some belly dancers at the auditions, but they have not been able to show the essence of their technique and dance soul in this short amount of time and hence not convinced the jury to send them to the next level.

SYTYCD is not looking for dancers; it's looking for drama. BUT, given that -- the judges also know that some artists might be great dancers but won't be able to compete in the other categories of dance.

On top of THAT, they have NO idea how to judge ethnic dance.

You can say one dancer or another is entertaining, but only someone with some training in the actual ethnic dance form would know if it truly represents the form.


The question of why no belly dancers seems to get through were once asked in a class I attended. The teacher said "it is because the belly dancers who auditioned aren't really dancers" (i.e. in a classical way).

Well, I think it's because the belly dancers don't "Cross train" in theatre dance. This show is ALLLLLLLLLL about theatre. A professional ballet dancer -- who focuses all her time and energy on ballet and doesn't cross train in jazz and ballroom -- won't get through because she isn't also competent in modern dance, hiphip, ballroom, swing, etc.

But what defines a dancer (genre not specified)?

There have been some AWESOME break dancers on that show. But my husband doesn't consider them to be dancers because their movement isn't dependent upon the music. (You could argue the same thing about modern dance.)

I won't go there. I say it's all dance because it's a physical response to music or rhythm. Some of it I really like; some of it I don't ever care to see again in my life. Some of it is more entertaining than others, and some of it is more artistic and challenging than others. But in the end it's all dance.
 

Greek Bonfire

Well-known member
I honestly don't think it's a matter of auditioning right - I think the dance is still not respected by other professionals but still thought of as that "stripper dance." In fact, there was one bellydancer who has a ballet background who was ridiculed and she is an awesome, serious dancer. The problem is the perception - when that will change most likely will not occur in my lifetime :(
 

hede

New member
So just to comment hede: Perhaps if you started with extensive training in ballet at age 4, jazz and hip-hop at age 10 and belly dance at age 13, you might have a chance at SYTYCD while still in your twenties?

very sad, but the way the show is, probably so...to cross genres I guess you would need strong flexible legs for all the contemporary, and more jumping and leaping(!) not something we tend to do in bellydance ;) I think bellydance has a very different aesthetic quality which the judges wouldn't know how to judge.

And back to the question of technique - I wonder if the judges would realise how much technique is involved in bellydance or maybe it is all just seen as 'shaking around' from the old hoochie coochie image as someone else has said already. I wonder what they would say about someone like Sadie - would they consider that pop/locking? or just not appreciate it? I seem to remember they had a pole installed for some auditions and I think some pole dancers got through - so it's got to be more than the 'stripper' image - it's the moves they don't understand...sorry , just rambling now...
 

TribalDancer

New member
There have been some AWESOME break dancers on that show. But my husband doesn't consider them to be dancers because their movement isn't dependent upon the music. (You could argue the same thing about modern dance.)

Um...what?! How does he get that? One thing I have loved about the great breakdancers on SYTYCD is that they respond so COMPLETELY tot he music--they know every little nuance and use key parts to accent with their bodies. I mean, hello?! Is he watching the same show as we are?
 

Greek Bonfire

Well-known member
Um...what?! How does he get that? One thing I have loved about the great breakdancers on SYTYCD is that they respond so COMPLETELY tot he music--they know every little nuance and use key parts to accent with their bodies. I mean, hello?! Is he watching the same show as we are?

:lol:They say that about us bellydancers too! :rolleyes:
 

Eve

New member
SYTYCD & BD.

What we have is not codified. People don't have an ideal image that your arm MUST be here. Your foot MUST be here etc.
Other dance forms (not all) are precise in detailing which body part goes where - so you can say whether someone is doing it correctly or not because you have a standard to adhere to.

To not have one in BD is both a blessing and a curse because it allows you to move to suit your body and your dance changes with you do but it also leaves it open for anyone to throw on a coin belt and start up teaching & also means (I think) people value it less. Because there is no standard the BD police won't nick your bedlah if you do something they don't like.
:cool:
Besides if you think how long it takes to get good at BD - you're always learning. Who has time to take x amount of ballet, tap, jazz, street dance, modern, flamenco, salsa, classes? I don't have the time I want to give to BD let alone anything else.
 

staranise

New member
I'd know I'm a bit late to this thread, but I'd like to share my thoughts, if I may...

the Suhaila / Sadie perfect layering thing can also be compared to photorealism in the Art world. It is common (at least in my experience) for people with minimal experience with visual arts, think the ability to render an artwork like a photo is the most amazing thing in the world. They may assume that those who paint in more expressive styles must lack the skills.

When I was a child, I was guilty of thinking like this. So I practised drawing every day, until I could draw photo-realistically. But my artworks were just mere copies of the photos, and were totally lacking in soul and expression. when I was 17 and preparing my first body of work for my final year in highschool, I went through a huge transformation. Even though I had been drawing for most my life, I had to re-teach myself to actually create art.

I see the value in being able to render a face completely life like as a skill which I can pick and choose to use when I see fit. My style of work now generally has elements of near realism, mixed in with raw and expressive areas, and the contrast between the two is of great interest to me.

Likewise, I can see the value of being able to dance with immaculate layers, and I am currently taking the online classes with Suhaila in order to learn that skill. But you won't see me dancing to an entire song like that, just as you won't see me exhibiting a photorealistic piece, though I may practice it in my journal.
 

Anthea Kawakib

New member
specific dancers who have great technique & feeling too

You asked which dancers? For awesome technique AND dancing with feeling I always think of Dahlena. She's the right blend of "American" classic dance technique and Middle Eastern Dance.
The tricky part is other styles of bellydance have their own technique that might not mesh with what we think of as "dance technique" so it's kind of like the old apples & oranges thing...
 

maria_harlequin

New member
Hmmm...my take on using art to compare it to belly dance and techniques associated with it is that photo realistic art can STILL have plenty of expression. I'm not talking about art that's so realistic you think it's a photograph because what's the point of that? But I hope no one thinks that expressive and GOOD art is paint splatters on a canvas ala Jackson Pollock. I know I'm going to be opening up a can of worms on this especially with art students but I find a lot of the so called "expressive" and "genius" artists not to be artists at all and what what they're creating isn't art either...even if it may seem aesthetically pleasing like a good design. Yes, my view on what is art and isn't art may seem incredibly limiting to some like my view of belly dance. I'm a big supporter of the Art Renewal Center and Good Art websites and both of them reflect my views on what is good art, bad art, and what isn't art.
 

Shanazel

Moderator
Ah, poor Jackson Pollack comes in for so much criticism. ;) Actually, I am fascinated by his stuff. One of my teachers (yep, an art teacher) pointed out that to appreciate some forms of art a person needs a particular type of education. I thought it was nonsense at the time, but as I've learned more, I've appreciated more. Sort of tics me off that ol' Richard was right, because I didn't like him, but I have to give the devil his due. :lol:

I think we're wandering off on a tangent if not completely off topic. That's fine with me prsonally, but as moderator I am forced to drop a tiny hint about staying on point and maybe starting a new thread about this fascinating side road into "What is Art?"
 

maria_harlequin

New member
Ah, poor Jackson Pollack comes in for so much criticism. ;) Actually, I am fascinated by his stuff. One of my teachers (yep, an art teacher) pointed out that to appreciate some forms of art a person needs a particular type of education. I thought it was nonsense at the time, but as I've learned more, I've appreciated more. Sort of tics me off that ol' Richard was right, because I didn't like him, but I have to give the devil his due. :lol:

I think we're wandering off on a tangent if not completely off topic. That's fine with me prsonally, but as moderator I am forced to drop a tiny hint about staying on point and maybe starting a new thread about this fascinating side road into "What is Art?"

I'm sorry if I was wandering off topic! I just wanted to emphasize on the fact that just because you use A LOT of technique doesn't mean that it takes away from expressing yourself.

And my last post about this...I took classes on modern art in college and learned all about the Modernist movement, DADA, Pollock, Picasso and what was the reasoning behind what they did...and I even had to do a few modern art pieces myself. I do appreciate the reasoning behind it all and I even said to this to my peers that always found me a hard core "Realist". I appreciate it but I in no way do I find it to be art...Pollock's work would make pretty wrapping paper and it's an interesting design, but it's not art to me. Art to me isn't "art is everything" and has very specific boundaries...just like belly dancing.
 
Last edited:

Sita

New member
Moderator Notice

Dear all,

sorry for any confusion caused but I have just made two separate threads out of the posts that were here before. The Posts centred on Art are now in the off-topic section here: http://www.bellydanceforums.net/off-topic/10880-art.html#post137137


Maria's posts on Suhaila now has a separate thread here: http://www.bellydanceforums.net/instructors-students/10879-suhaila-being-anti-aesthetic-these-days-her-choreography.html

I apologise again but making two thread out of interconnecting posts is very fiddly.
any problems or concerns please feel free to pm me.

Sita
 
Last edited:

walladah

New member
It always seemed

...to me that technique makes me free to express myself.

It is as if it makes the body ready to do anything the mind and heart wish in relation to the music.

Maybe I am too addicted to the music, which means the music creates my dance.

The more I work with music, the more technique I need. And the more I train myself, the more technique is needed to express the tiniest of feelings and music details.

Therefore, it is possible that there is not any contradiction between technique and feeling, maybe they are bound together.

On the other hand, I would never criticize any dancer or any artist that prefers one to the other (technique to feeling or vice versa). I accept they approach, but yes, I always like artists who combine both, or actually who are so technically skilled that they pay attention to their feelings only!! But this is a matter of taste...
 
Top