Not at all. And please note - I am neither agreeing nor disagreeing with you, only attempting to understand your viewpoint, which, here, was clear and easy to get.
,,
A'isha writes- Actually, I am not as sure as you are that you do understand my viewpoint, for reasons that i will explain later in this response.
Ok, so you believe the dance retains it authenticity even through its evolution, as long as that evolution happens within those specific countries.
A'isha writes- Not at all. I think that evolution must happen within the cultural boundaries of the dance, not the geographical regions of the countries. Evolution can happen anywhere, but in order for it to remain belly dance, it has to happen in a certain cultural spirit.
Well, of course (except the caramel and yogurt ref. - didn't quite catch that). But the question is always, what "specific elements" and who decides that?
A'isha writes- It is not something that is "decided". It is the way it is. Some things happen at a dance's inception and remain. The originators of the dance developed something very specific. It is clear to see when you watch ethnic dancers and those who can reach into that ethnic essence.
I look forward to the day the dance community is able to come to a consensus on this issue. It'll certainly remove a huge amount of internal dissension and make discussions with the general public easier and more consistent.
A'isha writes-I find that I am very consistent in what I say, and that the general public understands me just fine because they have the same definition for the dance as I do. It may not be based in as much education, but the main point is there. I find that dancers tend to argue about what is and what is not Tribal, Goth, AmCab/Amerian Oreintal, etc. I also find that educated dancers right away are aware of what is Turkish, Egyptian and Lebanese. It is because of this essence and feeling that has and is always there, regardless of what evolutions these dances go through, that make them always and readily identifiable as belly dance.
Since you believe only those born to the culture (with rare exceptions) can understand it well enough to perform the dance expertly, it follows that for those whose desire IS to gain that expertise, there is no reason for them to pursue the study of authentic dance, no matter how deep their passion for it may be, because they will never attain their goal.
A'isha writes- Understanding the dance from an expert point of view takes years anyway, so I am not sure what your point is here. I think that most people, unless they are very young and inexperienced in life, or very obsessive, do not make a habit of pursuing a goal that they can not reach, but instead recognize and accept their limitations. I can use pottery as an example. I am not a good potter now and will never be a great one. I do not have it in me, as I am discovering after about 1 1/2 years of practice. However, I can still enjoy making pottery at the level of inexpertise in which I seem to hang out, and enjoy the process itself, or the feel of the clay, the experimenting with glazes, etc. it does not always have to be about becoming an expert.
Folks who truly love an art form honor it and aspire to be the best they can be within it. To tell them, sorry, you weren't born to the right culture and you'll never be any good at it is, to my mind, abhorrent.
A'isha writes- The best one can be can be a personal goal. And in 30 years of teaching, I have never once made any statements about anyone "not being born into the right culture". I have to ask if you find it abhorrent when someone must accept that they will never be a prima ballerina or a first rate writer or reach the level if painting skill that it takes to create light like Vermeer. Can people not work at all of these things in a more
Zen manner and be happy to create without reaching the level of expert? What is abhorrent is when one feels like their own needs and their own ego should come before the artistic endeavour itself.
To rephrase this and paragraph two - as long as the change happens within the countries of origin, the dance remains authentic. Any growth or change that happens outside those countries changes the essence of the dance to the point it can no longer be considered authentic. (Again, neither agreeing nor disagreeing, just ensuring I understand you.)
A'isha writes- This above is the main reason why I do not think you do understand what I am saying. That is NOT what I said or implied at all. I stated, very succinctly, that in order for the dance to remain the dance, it must have certain cultural elements. Occasionally there have been dancers who have innovated and remained true to the essence of the dance, outside of countries of origin. Most often what has happened is that people have created new dance forms, based usually mostly on movement vocabulary alone, without any of the original spirit and essence of the authentic dances.
You've taken a lot of time to explain all this to me, A'isha, and done a really good job of it. I understand your stance and the reasons behind it, and that matters very much! I appreciate the effort you've made here, and also the love you hold for the dance.
A'isha writes- Thankyou, but obviously it was not enough since you really do not seem to get my point, but instead seem to be hinting that I am in some way discouraging dancers instead of encouraging clarity in intent. I do love the dance very much, and it is that love, and a need for dancers to truly understand what it is they are toying with when they call everything that comes down the pike, "belly dance" that keeps me able to fight what really is an uphill battle. However, in the past few years, more and more dancers are beginning to crave clear definition, and I am much encouraged.
Regards and Happy Holidays,
A'isha
God bless!
A.C.