Burlesque

[pamelaneko]

This is a very interesting article by Dan Savage, and it's making the rounds in the burlesque community.

http://www.thestranger.com/seattle/the-burlesque-shoah/Content?oid=4399613

"...Because without some negative feedback, without criticism, the local burlesque bubble is destined to burst."

When I started burlesque, I tried very hard to spend time w

Comments

[aynatonal]

This is *such* a charged issue that it's hard to tackle the whole of it. I'm going to zoom in on the "audience" question for a minute--who are they and how do we serve them best?

Whenever we start talking about "the audience" as some sort of monolith, I think it becomes unproductive really quickly. Who is our audience, if we're defining "our" as every burlesque troupe in the city? Can we in any way define their collective taste? Can we really suss out (and fulfill) their expectations?

I can talk about what is to *my* taste very easily. I'm actually pretty conventional in that I most enjoy looking at beautiful bodies. I also like performers who connect with the audience, who show awareness--even if only for a well chosen moment--that they know we're watching. I like good dancers and good actors, but really, I'm generally satisfied if a routine looks well rehearsed. I like grace and humor and intelligence. If something goes horribly wrong, I appreciate bravado and a willingness to brazen it out, if it can't be hidden.

But I am not "the audience." People come to our show with *so many* expectations, and lots of them leave satisfied and some of them probably don't, but our audience is not "the audience" either. I do think there's something *very* problematic about any performer/producer/troupe trying to unilaterally enforce some sort of personally perceived community standard based on...what, exactly? I mean, I think we can all agree that "Please Don't Suck," and "Please Be Entertaining," are maybe helpful baseline standards, if we're interested in the general health (and by this I mean financial viability) of the scene at large, but what constitutes not sucking and being entertaining probably varies wildly depending on one's personal values.

I think the question of "Is it OK to challenge the audience?" (by showing them imperfect bodies, by deliberately creating discomfort or thwarting their expectations) gets mixed up with the question of "What is commercial?" (pleasing the audience by giving them *only* what is easiest for them to swallow). And really, what is best for the scene? Not everyone's goal for burlesque is the same, not everyone's product is equally commercial, and I wonder if Dan didn't do the whole discussion a disservice by comparing the burlesque scene, with it's many, many, *many* diverse avenues and goals and approaches, with drag, which really has more limited applications, instead of with a theatrical form like improv, which is maybe a closer analogue.

In summary: I love talking about this stuff.