Brea

A'isha: what Tarik said above. Sorry for being unclear.

Tarik: this is exactly what I mean (referring to your comments about how masculine/feminine are not perceived the same way everywhere, etc).

__________________
www.breamorgiane.com

Tarik Sultan

Dear Khanjar: You hit the nail right on the head about the confusion that most men live with. We are constantly being conditioned from the day we are born to override our natural responses, feelings and opinions to fit a concept. The confusion over how men in Sharki should present themselves is just a symptom of a much larger confusion.

I think a great deal of homophobia has to do with the fear of being seen as weak and the potential for victimization and rejection that would result. Therefore, what is foremost in men's minds is not looking weak and defenseless. You make an interesting point about gay men blazing the trail for the rest of us, keeping in mind that most gay men are NOT the effeminate weak stereotype, but just the same in temperament and presence as most men. However, because they are comfortable with themselves, or have been forced to confront their demons in ways that straight men don't, they realize that their masculinity is not dependent on many of the "codes" we've been conditioned to cling to.

I noticed this in fashion and it showed me something. In the mid 80's when I was in High School the crack epidemic and the resulting violence was at its hight. I would avoid going home as long as I could because I didn't know if I would make it to my front door alive, so I hung out in the City. There were two sides of the Village, the Gay side and the Punk side. Now what they both had in common was that the guys did not conform to the social standards of acceptable dress and hairstyles. The punks wore bright hair colors and earrings , the gay guys were wearing hairstyles with lines and designs shaved into their heads and stud earrings. Now most of these gay guys were not from the City but from the inner city areas, however, they were very masculine. Many of them were gang members who would sneak off to Christopher Street so they could openly be with their lovers in public and not hide. Back in the neighborhoods the guys would ask them why they dressed the way they did, (but because they were really tough kick asses, and also had girl friends, they would never be accused of being gay), they'd just say, "it's the new fashion". Pretty soon the straight guys started imitating and next thing you knew guys started wearing high top fades, earrings, PINK. The point that I'm making, is that because they couldn't tell these guys were gay, they saw that things that they previously considered sissy didn't necessarily make you sissy. You could still be a tough guy and have an earring or a fancy hair style. Had these fashion pioneers been effeminate gays, it would have never caught on because no guy wants to "look like a queen".

The case is that men live with a great deal of fear and anxiety and they have to see enough guys that they can relate to doing something before they have the courage to try it themselves.

Tarik Sultan

I't may seem simplistic because the way i wrote it, but the colonial experience and its impact on the colonized was and is a very complex dynamic that we the post colonials all over the world are dealing with to this day.

You have to understand that in a colonial relationship there is a power dynamic at play. The two parties are not on an equal footing. I think that it's easier for non white colonials or people of color such as Afro Americans etc to understand what I'm trying to express here. Also understand that the colonial experience was not an event, it was an evolving process and so it's effects and impact on the society and the psyche of the people developed over time. This was a period that changed the entire fabric of Egyptian society and most of the tensions that we see happening today in that region are the results of these trying to come to terms with this past.

What you say here is true, but in the case of this dance and here I'm referring to it in a very general broad sense, there was a history of male performers prior to the colonial experience, not only in Egypt, but throughout the entire Islamic World. As I said before, in this period, the outward appearance of the performer was not an issue. A male dancer might be anything from a regular boy or young man to a full out drag queen, it didn't matter and people did not fee themselves sullied by watching such entertainers because it was not seen as a reflection on their personal character. This is documented tradition that was hundreds if not thousands of years old. Then within the space of less than a hundred years, an attitude that existed for eons suddenly changes? Doesn't that signal a red flag to you that something changed very radically in the society? This isn't a very simplistic dynamic at all.
[/quote]

What do a lot of us have in the West as images of male dancers? Age-specific styles like street-dance, high skill/training performance like ballet, folk-styles that everyday folk don't do any more, and <cringe> dad-dancing at the disco. No wonder some guys feel they need How To Dance and Be Manly rules, however nisguided, when venturing into unfamiliar territory.[/quote]

Exactly!

Aisha Azar

Dear Brea,
I don't know what Tarik said. Can you please tell me, in your own words, with your own thoughts, what you meant about the colonial influence on dance? there was no belly dance until about a hundred years ago, so how can we say that men have belly danced since colonial times? They have certainly done dances with movements of hips, but that is not the same as raqs sharghi. The Ghawazi have done hip articulated dances with a posture that show off the torso for hundreds of years but it was not belly dance.
Regards,
A;isha

Tarik Sultan

Dear unmentionable one who never reads my posts, and forum members greetings:

As the person in question claims to not read my posts, (yeah right), I guess this is more for your benefit.


I'll start by saying..... again, that its not that I disagree with her totally or do not see the truth in what she say because there is a lot of truth there, (and perhaps some time between now and Armagedon this fact will sink in), the issue is that often, frequently... almost always what she states is not the whole truth, which is a very different thing than saying she is wrong. There are many pieces to this puzzle. She has some of them, I have parts and the rest of you have others. To get a clear understanding we can't dismiss the pieces that one or the other has. We have to look at all of them because each holds an important part without which a clear and accurate picture can not be made.

I will say this though, with regards to the colonial impact on Egyptian society, one cannot so easily dismiss the colonial experience. While the colonials were a minority their presence and the impact they had rippled throughout the entire society. This is a dynamic that is true whether we are speaking about Latin America, Africa, the Caribbean, Asia or the Middle East. The entire economic system was changed, the educational system was changed, the legal systems were changed. Therefore although they were a numeric minority, the impacts they had on every area of life was felt throughout the society from top to bottom.

For the ruling class the message was clear, whereas they were once in control, they now had to answer to another authority. An authority that was economically and militarily more advanced than they were who would and did use force to implement their will. One only needs to read the history of the Opium Wars to understand this dynamic. So if you are in the ruling class, it is and WAS made painfully clear in no uncertain terms, that in the eyes of the new rulers, they were beneath contempt. Their traditions were seen as ridiculous at best and barbaric at worse. When the balance of power is equal, you are in a position to fight back and assert your right to pride in your culture and way of life, but when you are the defeated, what can you say in retaliation, especially when your position is dependent on the wishes of these invaders and their requirements of you in order to maintain the status quo? Think of the psychological impact that has. So what do you do? You adapt and adapt they did. Will this adaptation be felt throughout society, of course it will.

When the lower classes starts to see members of their upper class abandoning their traditions, dress, architecture, legal systems, tastes in entertainment, conducting business in a foreign language, of course it has a psychological impact. Everyone in Egypt knows that if you have aspirations to the Middle Class or higher you can't go to school or university, enter certain establishments, restaurants or show up to work wearing a gallabeya, no matter how much money you have. Wearing traditional garb in Egypt automatically places you in the lower class in the eyes of society and this is a fact. In 1988 Morocco took her group to Egypt. Our friend Osman came up from Luxor to do some business and joined us. On every occasion that he joined us at the nightclubs we went to he was denied entry because he was wearing traditional clothing. If it had not been for the fact that she had a group of over 50 people and threatened to take her money elsewhere, he would not have gotten in. What does that say when you are scorned by your own society for not wearing western clothing?

So did colonialism have an impact on the native arts? Well, lets see. Who has the money to heir entertainers in the first place? The Middle and Upper class. Therefore, if that class begins to view these entertainers with embarrassment they will no longer employ them and their tradition will die out. While we're spending so much time talking about male dancers, lets not forget that this is exactly the same time when the traditions of the Ghawazee began to die out and was eclipsed by the Mohamed Ali Street dancers which in time evolved into Oriental Dance as we know it now.

With regards to "belly dancing" being considered manly..... Well how could it be in the context in which it was originally created and in the paradigm it now exists in? This is a theatrical expression that we all know was created in the context of displaying femininity. What we have to keep in mind however is that just as iron is an indispensable ingredient of steel, raks Baladi is an indispensable ingredient of Sharki as ALL Egyptians dancers learned it first at home before becoming professional dancers. Therefore the question that we must ask is whether or not Baladi is gender specific. The answer is no. While there are dances that are male gender specific like all Ardah, Bambouteya, Debka, etc Baladi or Shabbi are not. They are gender neutral and are done by both sexes. As I have said in the past, what the Ghawazee and male dancers did in the pre Sharki era was raks Baladi. Sharki evolved from Baladi.

So if men did perform Baladi in the past, why do we not have any male Baladi performers in the Media today? The reason is simple, the composition of the audience and the context changed. In the past dancers were hired by the community FOR the community at family functions. At the turn of the century this changed. No longer were they dancing primarily for the community, but they were doing so for a foreign community and where as they previously performed in homes, they were now in public music halls. Who were the paying customers in these establishments? MEN. What did they want to see? WOMEN. Therefore, the expectations of the audience was no longer simply entertainment, amusement, but the viewing of feminine beauty with an increasing emphasis on the body. So were would a guy fit into this equation? He doesn't. Performing in a nightclub is a woman's job because it is primarily about entertaining a male audience.

For men to take the stage it would mean a paradigm shift. In fact it would mean a return to the original values of the culture to some respect, that is dance as entertainment and amusement rather than the expectation of feminine display. Therefore, when a guy makes it clear that he is not doing Sharki, what he is being emphatic about is that he is NOT trying to compete in a context and paradigm of displaying himself for male attention. This is why I keep emphasizing that for men in Egypt to be solo performers, whether that be Sharki or Baladi, they have to present themselves in such a way as to not give the impression that they are trying to compete on that level. An interesting question for this young man is although he is emphatic that he is not doing Sharki, but Baladi, would he consider performing Baladi professionally in public? Why or why not.

Tarik Sultan

Dear Brea: Feel free to play this pointless silly game if it be your will. For the rest of the forum, you understand.

toodles

Mark_Balahadia

Ankh's article is pure crap. I remember reading that when I was first starting out and I thought it was rubbish!

I honestly cannot stand men who are too masculine on stage. It doesn't make sense to me and I think it's an incorrect representation. ra's el shar'i is feminine and at least from what I've seen from male dancers in the Middle East.

Even though some claim otherwise, Tito has feminine aspects to his dancing even with the wardrobe. He's heavily influenced by Dina (especially in regards to sticking his butt out Dina style). Seeing Tito sticking his arse out and wiggling it from side to side isn't exactly a "masculine" move especially if you were to contrast it with male folkloric dances, like dabke.

__________________
badde 3eish!!! www.markbalahadia.com

Moon

And what I also can't stand is the "be strong as opposed to the weak female thing

Tarik Sultan

What those guys are doing is not being "masculine" they are being a caricature. MEn do not go around in real life stomping and clinching their fists. They are TRYING so hard to prove that they are men that they end up looking like robots. As I said, its the result of cultural misunderstanding.

It has been a feminine art thus far because it was developed to portray feminine beauty to an audience that was almost exclusively male. That was the context that it evolved in. There was no thought of a man being in it, even though there had been male Baladi dancers in the past and although there probably were still male Baladi dancers in the rural areas as well. This was the nightclub and not a community celebration.

As for the dancers who perform in Lebanon now, I've only seen Musbah and a clip of A'la, and if what you told me about him is true, he has an agenda other than dancing and therefore is not exactly an accurate role model. The point is are those dancers "feminine" because they are dancing or are they feminine in real life and therefore it is just a natural part of their character?

I know Tito personally and have seen him on and off stage as have you I'm sure. Whatever Tito projects onstage is part of his personality. He doesn't believe that a man should project femininity on stage when dancing Sharki. In his words, a man should not forget he's a man and shouldn't dance like a woman. This is what not only he, but Aida Nour told me.

Raks Sharki is based on the foundation of Baladi and in Baladi dancing, men can and do express grace and sensuality, especially whith the hands and arms. If this is what you mean by "feminine" essence, I can understand that, but that does not mean "womanly" or that you should look like you are imitating or competing with a woman. Maybe in liberal Lebanon where they are looking for shock value that is fine, but Egypt is a whole other ball of wax and in the USA.... Lets just say that I've lost more than one job venue because a feminine acting and looking guy got booked there. It didn't attract the ladies and made the men feel uncomfortable therefore putting a bad taste in the owner's mouth about having ANY male dancers at all.

That's a matter of opinion, but even if he is, that means nothing. My only teacher was Morocco, a woman. My only role models for professional Middle Eastern Dancing were all women, Mona Said, Souhair Zaki, Fifi Abdou, Lucy, Nabawia Mustafa the list goes on and on. I took from them steps, technique, the concepts of expression of personality and relating to the audience, but I did not try to emulate their persona, rather I strove to find and develop my own. I experimented with executing the movements on my body so that they looked natural to me. What helped me was seeing how men in Egypt executed the same movements without TRYING to look "masculine" but just being natural and themselves and that's why I don't look like a robot trying to prove something when i dance.

The bottom line is that unfortunately because of the negative propaganda in the past against Middle Eastern men and their sexuality, they are NOW super sensitive around the issue of homosexuality. In the past, they had no problem watching a male dancer, even if he was in drag because it was not seen as a personal reflection on themselves or their culture, but that changed due to the colonial experience. Therefore, to return to the point where it is not an issue there are going to have to be men dancing in a way that does not negate the personality and character of a man. Then and only then will they get use to the idea of a man dancing on stage and once that is achieved, then they will understand that an effeminate man is just one person and they will feel free to watch him for his entertainment value without feeling the fear that their sexuality and manhood is being called into question.

And sticking out your ass isn't exactly a feminine thing either. Its a rude thing bordering on being nasty. That's not exactly something I want to see anyone do. Every time I see Tito do it I expect him to let out big fart! I think it's rude and tacky and is probably his way of pushing a few buttons. Although I think the shimmying in people's faces is far worse. With him I think its an ego trip. however, when watching dancers, regardless of their national or cultural origin, we have to keep in mind that they are all individuals and that not everything they do comes from a place of good sense, or manners and is not meant to be a representation of what the dance is or should be about and certainly not an indication of what should be emulated.

Aisha Azar

Dear Gang,
I think that many people might misinterpret what I am saying when I discuss the feminine essence of the dance. Feminine essence has less to do with movement than it does in the way that one uses movement. It is about body carriage, about how a person responds to the music, etc. It is a whole picure and has little to do with just male or female "movements", though of course, our very anatomies make some difference.
In looking at Tito, I see that he is very in touch with the feminine essence of the dance. He has learned to stand in such a way as to make the torso prominent as opposed to be so much in his shoulders and upper chest, as he would be if he were dancing, say Ardeh or Debke. Also, in the animal kingdom and in the human kingdom, any kind of sticking out of the butt tends to be a submissive, "feminine" position, if you will. It is how other primate males show submission to alpha males, and what other female primates do to show they are ready to have sex. And whether or not we like it, much of our sexual behavior and message system is based on the fact that our DNA is only very fractionally different than that of our nearest primate relatives, and we often use similar signals. Nearly as I can tell, they are universal and not cultural.
There are other things I could probably say about this if I had not had less than half a cup of coffee so far... By the way, I can type with one eye closed
and the other half open with only ten or so mistakes per word.
( Hi there, Markito!!)
Regards,
A'isha