My Blog
Up for debate
Wed, August 8, 2007 - 10:24 AM
Larger image available at
img159.imageshack.us/img159/...evu3.jpg
[Added later: Okay I'm not defending Morris here, because this *does* make me mad. And I don't know where he got it from. But here is a good example of the other side of the story, as posted in Suhaila's tribe on tribe.net: "Maria, MED dance was not started for men. It was a dance of celebration. And if I'm not mistaken, men were never allowed to see the dancing in the first place. It wasn't until the cinema exposed it and threw a different light on it, that it was "dancing to entice men."
Okay, very reassuring, but what I want to know is where is *this* perspective coming from? I want to see some historical documents or well-researched papers to convince me that either side is true.]
Wed, August 8, 2007 - 10:24 AM -
permalink -
2 Comments
2 Comments |
add a comment |
|
Thu, August 9, 2007 - 4:17 PM
belly dance history romanticized
Let me give my credentials so you do not think I am just another person with an uninformed opinion. I am an academic scholar who has studied culture and dance extensively...that includes history, geography, sociology and so on, with an emphasis in Middle Eastern dance.
First, the pelvic movements he associates with sex and belly dance actually predate harems...and Christianity/Hinduism/Islam, etc. Second, the harem fantasy is false. Societies were separated by gender and harem (which means forbidden or off limits) was simply the women's quarters. It was the space where women could live and play without fear of intrusion by a non-relative male. These women could be wives, mothers, sisters, aunts, servants, etc. They were not sex slaves. The romanticized harem came out of Orientalist fantasies created by Western writers and artists who could not get into real harems being that they were-duh-off limits to non-relative males. These men spent their time with prostitutes and sadly created false assumptions that all women from the Middle East were primarily sexual beings. That would be like someone from another country spending all his time with prostitutes in the United States and then writing as if all American women behave the same way. Third, some of the moves in belly dance come out of child birth ritual...not all. What about the shoulder shimmy?! Fourth, only in the Western world are pelvic and torso based movements equated with sexuality. That is a cultural construction! That means, it has no basis in logic. It is a connection that we learn. A hip circle is just that. A hip circle. Period. Fourth, think about it. How many moves that you do as a belly dancer could you really do during sex? Really? Fifth, this dance comes for the Middle East where, in some places, women can get beaten by strangers if those strangers deem her to be dressed inappropriately. There are documented cases of women being beaten with sticks and rods for accidentally flashing an ankle in public or because a strand of hair escaped her head covering. How outwardly sexualized do you think that culture really is? I appreciate the you respect this man's work as a sociologist but based on my ten years of academic research at the graduate level and beyond, this 'scholar'--who should be critical of stereotypes and false assumptions-- is merely repeating stereotypes based on Western assumptions and uneven power relations. His work is demeaning to women from the Middle East and to belly dancers everywhere. Marjani |
|
Sun, August 12, 2007 - 2:26 PM
Thank you very much for your enlightening comment. I want to make it clear to everyone that Morris is a "personal hero" not because he is a fabulous scholar-- as I said he has always been controversial, although this is the first time I've found him personally offensive-- but because his out-of-the-box thinking on sociobiology inspired my academic direction, and because of his work as a surrealist painter. I appreciate and agree with all of you who found this piece ignorant and offensive.
|
