A contradiction in terms

Before I get into my end of year conundrum I thought I'd open with a big wish that you've all had a happy festive season and that your 2012 is fantabulous no matter how it starts on NYE or how horrible (or good) 2011 was.

"Life is what happens when you start living outside your comfort zone"

Oh, and I have smexy new glasses too. Proof with an appalling webcam shot!.

But... onto my thoughts about a contradiction in terms.
I was put onto the following video of "belly burlesque" by someone on Tumblr:



The commentary posted with the video was:

"I can’t help but rant about this dance. It’s very sexy but very offensive to the belly dance. The way she takes off her close reinforce the idea that anyone who belly dance is equivalent to strippers and it was created an audience, especially male audience for their pleasure. That’s not how the art form began. This dance gives mix signals. I love her outfit but she doesn’t have to take it off to be sexy. She is sexy with her clothes on!"

Reading the info posted with the video on YouTube gives a very different impression of what the video is about:

"Kristina Nekyia performs a burlesque piece with belly dance elements set to Drumspyder's "Nocturnal Stealth of Cats". The performance took place at Leela's "Arabian Summer" event with Kaya and Sadie in August 2009."

Which led me to think that the person who posted the video on Tumblr really got the wrong end of the proverbial stick here. While I agree that the girl in the video is very sexy with her clothes on, it got me thinking about belly fusions (don't worry, we're not going to go over the contentious grounds on tribal fusion here) - specifically belly burlesque.

This is where the contradiction in terms comes in.

Belly dance is a feminine dance which focuses on a clothed yet modest dancer embracing her movement, curves and other female attributes in a very sensual way.
Burlesque is a beautifully saucy dance which focuses on teasing the viewer with the dancer embracing her movement, curves and other female attributes in a very sexual way.

So we've got a fusion here which is sensual yet sexual, modest yet saucy and suggestive.

Sounds like it really shouldn't work. In the eyes of those in the belly world who are trying to separate people's thoughts on bellydance from the "wink wink nudge nudge" of the late 1800's American sideshow ideas which permeated modern culture it really has no place. After all, all dance styles borrow from each other. It's the natural way for a dance to grow and change with the moving times and remain relevant to the people who are experiencing and participating in it.

On the other side of things, burlesque has also taken on new meaning in this new century. Burlesque was the original cabaret show. It was saucy, showy and later in the night a bit more raunchy. However it was still relatively modest with most girls never showing more than a glimpse of naked skin to the audience. Think more The Moulan Rouge / can can girls than Showgirls.

It's one of those fusions which might just remain on the "no go" list until the one and only act which truly shows how it can be done (with no one else ever getting close).

Anyway, I should let you all get back to your days (rather than writing an essay) and go finish cleaning for my group of friends who are gathering here tonight at Chez Kis to celebrate the depature of 2011 and the arrival of 2012. Enjoy however you end this year and see you all next year.