Quote:
Originally Posted by Aniseteph
1."fresh approach to Egyptian style". Is it so stale and/or inaccessible as it is? "Fresh approach" is a phrase that often makes me go hmmmmm...
2. "...all the traditional classic movements of Arabic and Turkish dance..". Movements of.. And introducing aspects from other styles. Suggests mishmashing, even if it is explained at the time.
So if that's what you want to learn/teach, fine, and nice to have it described so clearly  . But to me the fundamental difference between the styles is more than just a different vocabulary of moves; it's a whole different attitude. A course of classes with a different style in each lesson would be a great way for students to make a more informed choice, but playing pick 'n' mix with the moves won't give you a feel for what Egyptian/Turkish/ATS etc might be really all about.
But hey, it might just be I'm reading it all wrong  |
you just got my point entirely. Most people get no idea of what egyptian dance is from their teacher. They think that it is just about the movements they drill (which are westernised anyway), so of course when they hear that they can get added value from all these other elements, they are NOT making an informed choice.
I have nothing against drilling as such, as Westerners,usually starting later eg as adults, we need to get our isolations ultra isolated before we are able to disregard that and get back to connecting with the music.
What we are getting so often these days is western oriental dance mixed in with westernised versions of other dance traditions.
Chicken tikka pizza, anyone? But how about if we made it with french brioche dough, and added some sauerkraut? When is a pizza not a pizza, and when is "fusion", or "tribal" no longer worth doing?