Sara

Lol- aye I'd give you rep but I'm still spreading it.

If I didn't agree with Aisha before (which I can't remember if I did or didn't) I do now. When I went to Corfu, all the Greek guys said it was a 'sexy dance' and the lads I work with and meet through dancing have all said that n all. At first when I started I thought it wont, but then when you get more into it you can see how sexual it really is. But not in a cheap tacky way, but an expressive way. I think...(Aww I'm only little, lol, well 18, my great gram tried giving me the sex talk the other day. She's 84! I was like, Gram, it's alright, we don't need to do this...)

__________________
With a little bit of this and a little bit of that, now shake your bum.... :P

cathy

Dear Shanazel,

Good point about scientists and their search for truth. Isn't that one way science progresses though--through disputing/disproving the ideas of others?

Dear A'isha,

I agree that whenever one culture adopts or appropriates a form from another, colonialist attitudes are a risk (or a given?). In my view, we should consider how colonialist attitudes were at work at the time this dance was first staged in the countries of origin--by the paying, mostly colonial audience, in the Western-style nightclubs set up mostly for their amusement. I would argue that the colonialist attitudes started then and played a big part in providing the sexy flirtatious perception of this dance both here and there. Sexualization and objectification with The Other and their mysterious, shocking, fascinating torso movements.

Cathy

Salome

This is a great topic... I'll drop my two cents in on it. There is not a generic form of Belly dance. I think realizing that is the first stepping stone to having a clearer idea of what is and is not belly dance...

As I see it, there are essentially 6 building blocks, that when put together, make 'fill in the style here' belly dance what it is: movement, movement expression, music, costume, purpose and spirit.

You may use the movement, music and costume but not actualize the expression of the movement, purpose and spirit and you've done missed the boat.

When you are missing one or more of the key building blocks that comprise a style of belly dance, it may be great dance it may be poor dance, but it is lacking the ingredients that make it belly dance.

Kharmine

Absolutely! What I think many people forget is that there can be many sides to a conclusion, because there are many ways to develop one.

Morocco has personal proof that at least some of the moves we use in "belly dancing" (a term she despises) are part of a Middle Eastern tradition to help women in childbirth. Others have scoffed at her report because it's not what they were told by other people, or they never saw it for themselves.

Two different conclusions don't necessarily have to cancel each out because the experiences of the researchers involved are different. There are different sources, times, places, experiences that are going to affect conclusions.

We can't always presume, without more research and an open mind, that ours are the definitive facts until we have done as much research as possible, cast a wide net and listened with an open mind. IMHO, conclusions should be presented pending further discovery.

__________________
What if the hokey pokey is really what it's all about?

Aisha Azar

Dear Cathy,
I believe, and this is my opinion, that the physical building blocks of the dance and general essence and feeling were there before any interference by the colonials. In fact, the dances that scandalized those westerners are the same ones from which belly dance gets its physical basis, and some of its general feeling and those dances were there before the colonials from the west. Many people again like to credit the West for belly dance being what it is, but I disagree. Like,once again, the Third World culture just too ( put you own adjective here) to come up with something like this by themselves. Sex sells and it has everywhere and forever!! If the only customers were Middle Easterners/ North Africans, the dance would still be the same. It was developed by Middle Easterners in Middle Eastern/North African context, and has that specific personality. What little the west might have contributed, and I believe it was very little, has not affected the sexuality of the dance. Consider the times; post-Victorian, but still very straight laced for the most part. I think the sexuality of the dance was not in any way enhanced by contact with the West, but certain presentations and mechanics were.
Regards,
A'isha

Brea

In this, I wholeheartedly agree with A'isha. Every person from the Middle East I've known or worked with has said the same (one of whom had been a bellydancer when she was younger). I think that the problem stems from the Western idea that sexual=dirty. There is a lot of foolishness about that kind of thing out there. I love that bellydance is the full expression of sexuality and sensuality. There isn't enough of that kind of thing out there, and that's what really draws me to the dance: it tells the oldest story of all.

Regarding Heyerdahl: there are of course many opinions, his being currently discredited, much like Margaret Mead's Coming of Age in Samoa. Mead was a great anthropologist, however. Ten years from now the story may be different, but that is how it currently stands. And it is true that the mistakes of others are how we learn and make progress in science...this includes the possible mistakes made by people who discredit others.

-Brea

Kharmine

Personally, I think "discredited" is a difficult term, and it's been used to imply that the person and his/her work is lacking in honest and competent scholarship. In neither Heyerdahl's nor Mead's cases do I believe that to be true -- some of their conclusions may have been found to be "unproven" in the end, or even mistaken but they were neither frauds nor incompetents.

In anthropology, as well as other fields, you can't rely on a small number of people to give you correct info. You have to cast a wide net, so to speak, look at as wide a variety of sources as you can, and then figure that some amount of what you get will be unreliable or inconclusive.

You also have to figure in other possible factors when you're trying to verify someone else's conclusions. Or risk being "discredited" yourself.

For instance, one of Margaret Mead's fiercest critics, Derek Freeman, apparently ignored the fact that the same women he talked to that Mead interviewed for "Coming of Age in Samoa" were, by the time he got to them, decades older, and more conservative. They had converted to Christianity, and Samoan culture was far different from what it was when Margaret Mead was interviewing the young people.

A reasonable person might have guessed that these now old grannies were going to be a tad less frank talking to a foreign man about their wild young days. Might even lie about all that sex they told Mead about back in their day. But Freeman just jumped on these late denials and used it as "proof" that Mead had been lied to when she first talked to those young girls.

No surprise, today Freeman's conclusions are generally discredited, not just disproven. He was accused of poor methodology, the same thing he accused Mead of. The apparent consensus of many anthropologists today is we may never know for sure if Mead was right. But she seems to have been acting on the best methods of her time. Freeman wasn't.

People give researchers misinformation for many reason. Poll takers and survey givers know that a fair amount of folks will give what they think is supposed to be the "right" answer -- something the researcher wants to hear, or the person thinks will reflect best on him or her. Sometimes, they just like messin' with other people's heads.

And, yep, interview these same folks at a different time under different circumstances and these same people may flat-out deny they said any such thing. They may even believe it.

That's why real research can't depend on a small amount of personal testimony, and can't ignore other factors that may have a bearing on that testimony, whether it changes or not.

__________________
What if the hokey pokey is really what it's all about?

Shanazel

Having two teenaged children and having been host to scores of their friends, I laugh everytime I read reports based on survey answers supplied by high school students. Do researchers really think all these kids are answering these nosy questions honestly? Some kids are honest enough, others say what they think they are expected to say, still others just make stuff up and laugh like hyenas afterwards.

And when I think of all the tourists I have told about jackalopes with a perfectly straight face... Someone, somewhere is telling friends that jackalope bucks are nocturnal and rarely seen, but that the does come out in the day and look like common jack rabbits. And of course, each jackalope buck has a herd of as many as twenty or thirty does, so the males are far less numerous than the females. The only thing that I can't explain (but that tourists never ask) is why a jackalope has deer antlers instead of antelope horns.

Piltdown Man Lives!

Aisha Azar

Dear Shanazel,
This is true, and in dealing with Middle Easterners/ North Africans, ( most of my experience is with Arabs) it is so important to remember that until they know you well, they are likely to be agreeable about anything you say because you are a "Guest" with a capital G or an Outsider with a capital O, and they do not want to cause you any discomfort. The other reason is that there is sometimes this kind of .... I don't know.... shyness maybe?, when dealing with people outside their own cultures. Many Arabs feel instinctively that they will be misunderstood and judged culturally. Unfortunately, they are often correct.They will say that belly dance is a sexy dance, but if you disagree, they will many times change direction simply not to insult you. However, once they know you well and like you, they will tell you the truth about things, about their feelings, about the way it is within their culture. So, the mixed messages have often led people to believe that Arabs are not trustworthy, which is not the case at all. They are just trying to keep a high comfort level in situations where they do not know the person well.
Another thing is that Arabs have a reputation for being volatile and easy to incite to riot, etc. I had a very interesting lesson in Arab communications when I went to stay with one of my teachers very early in my dance life. I noticed with some alarm that in normal conversation things could reach almost a shouting level, as one person would talk, the next would talk louder, the next would talk louder, maybe several people would talk at once..... then a moment silence and it would start all over, I have noticed this kind of communication pattern among Arabs who know each other well fairly often since then. It is sometimes intense, but it has never led to violence. It is just a different communication rhythm than we see among westerners, I think. I am used to it now, but it was a lesson to be learned.
Regards,
A'isha

Brea

To Kharmine:

Oh yes, I agree with you! That's what I meant by how science progresses, the endless argument: is this worthwhile, is it not. The Mead question I was referring to was not that, but that 'Samoa' was not a proper term to use (as there are more and different parts of Samoa and she should have been more specific in titling. Of course that is a small point, but again, I did most of my college education in Hawai'i, and you wouldn't believe how nit picky they get). I think I am trying to say that we should always be objective with any kind of research and not simply accept it wholeheartedly, which I think you are saying as well.

-Brea