Originally posted at The Opinioness of the World.
Do feminism and dance go together? Film, literature, sculpture, paintings and music can all be feminist or reveal a feminist message. Can artists convey feminism through the power of dance? I’ve been mulling over these thoughts when I watch So You Think You Can Dance. Initially, I didn’t think so. But why not? Dancers can portray strength, self-reliance, confidence and power, all elements of female empowerment.
While I’m kinda hooked on the show, I’m not exactly knowledgeable about dance. Well, unless you count my obsessions with the awesome Dirty Dancing and the ballet movie Center Stage. My only experience with dance came a few years ago when my oldest and dearest friend Sarah M. and I took belly dancing classes together. We shimmied our hips and undulated our bellies. The feminine fluidity of the movements put me in touch with my body in a way I had never felt before. I found it incredibly sensual and surprisingly empowering.
After doing a quick Google search of feminism and dance, I stumbled upon an interesting article about the proliferation of women in modern dance and how feminism united famous modern dancers and choreographers Isadora Duncan and Yvonne Rainer. Duncan, and later dancer/choreographer/icon Martha Graham who also explored female identity, railed against what they saw as the tortuous constrictions of ballet and ultimately puritanical society, demanding women’s emancipation, while Rainer combated voyeurism and the sexual objectification of women.
“In an age still dominated by the dictates of puritanism, Duncan dared to dance uncorseted. Dressed in a loose-fitting, free-flowing tunic, she rebelled not only against the corset per se, but also against everything it symbolized: The constraints – both physical and psychological – imposed upon women by Victorian culture. Miss Rainer on the other hand, is the product of a very different time (one inspired in large part by the example of Duncan and others like her): The so-called ”sexual revolution” of the 60′s and 70′s. Unlike the feminists of Duncan’s generation who longed for sexual freedom and viewed puritanical repression as an obstacle to the emancipation of women, many feminists of the 60′s and 70′s eyed the sexual revolution with considerable suspicion, fearful that it hadn’t really liberated women, but had simply made them more sexually available. Many radical feminists began to practice what the social critic Midge Decter calls ”the new chastity.” Thus, Yvonne Rainer’s insistence upon saying ”no” to so many of the voyeuristic and erotic pleasures that dance has traditionally offered begins to assume feminist implications when viewed against this ideological backdrop.”
Despite living in different eras, Duncan, Graham and Rainer all confronted conventions about dance, how women were supposed to dress and behave, and female expression. And therein lies the crux of art: evoking emotions and challenging perceptions. Dance captures what words cannot. Last week on SYTYCD, I watched Sonya Tayeh‘s “combat jazz” choreography of the brilliantly graceful and athletic Melanie and the dynamic and charismatic Sasha. Through this fierce performance, I’m now forever convinced feminism and dance can comprise the perfect pas de deux, pushing boundaries of the mind, body and soul.
One Comment
Forewarning: this could easily be considered off topic although I hope to argue (badly because it is more of an intuition than anything else) that it is not.
I registered just a little while ago and there are way too many articles at this point to comb through for more evidence so I’ll have to settle with this one. I have a question in my mind which is always lurking in the background whenever I read very articulate feminist articles. It is prompted by an aspect which I think is common in them. I also could be way off base so correct me if I am wrong.
It goes like this. Most articles are too idealistic. I have a very specific meaning so please don’t get angry too fast. I don’t mean that feminism cannot be realized. What I mean is the way many feminists talk about realizing it usually involves this picture of the beautiful, smart, driven, woman dealing with the problems of our misogynistic culture. The question I have is, what if you are ugly? That is, this image of women coming to terms with their body, learning to enjoy it, and indeed throwing off most of the superficial standards which are thrust upon them about what constitutes good looks (of course this is only one component of many feminisms), should be examined. As I imply it’s not as if this image is total crap but it does seem to exclude ugly women. Let me restate this: the idea behind it is good, the image is not. It seems a little narrow even if feminism is meant to widen the range of acceptable looks for women. In other words, just by the sheer preponderance of articles which paint the image of the (already in many respects) “perfect” woman, it is no surprise to me when I talk to, let’s just call them less than average looking women (and I haven’t forgotten that beauty standards are largely fabricated) and they nevertheless argue, and from what I could tell as not out of jealousy or random scorn with regards to average or above average looking women, that these other women are hypocritical in some deep sense by not thinking (in practice as opposed words) ALL women. To put it another way, it may be the case that many feminists, when they talk about feminism, are really only talking about the range of women which does not include the rather homely.
Okay. This is all rather complicated and I have probably made a mess of it. However, it might be some thing to think about. It presupposes that even if feminists try to divest themselves of the more vulgar beauty standards of the day, they still have standards which exclude a good number of women from joining in on the critique.
I hope I at least pointed in the direction of a possible concern. I guess all’s I am worried about is a lack of true honesty (about themselves I suppose primarily) on the part of many beautiful feminists.
And all of this may simply be a complete misunderstanding since I am male and despite whatever effort I put into suppressing the effects of socialization that happens to me as a male, it’s hard to see how I could ever understand what women go through except in pretty abstract terms.