I’m a ticket holder for the Balé Folclorico da Bahia show this Friday at the Flynn MainStage. So I was one of the people who received an email notice this afternoon, as follows:
‘We have just been informed by the company that two pieces in the program will contain male and female nudity as dancers portray certain gods. We wanted to let you know in case it affects your decision to attend. We will honor refund requests due to this development.’
Does anyone else besides me find this hilarious? I’ll tell you how I’m ‘affected’: I’m making a note to self to bring along my opera glasses!
Normally, people are even more psyched to see naked bodies — especially buff dancer-type bodies — than clothed ones (unless, of course, they appear in an American Apparel ad on the back cover of Seven Days). I’d think the Flynn could be selling more tickets ‘due to this development.’ Ah, well, guess they gotta cover all the possibilities.
Anyhoo, my second reaction is, what gods are these, exactly, who roam creation in their birthday suits? I thought gods had robes and stuff. Maybe Brazil is too hot. Whatever. If a god wants to take it all off, who are we to say no?
I sure won’t. I’m just going to enjoy this professional, award-winning, world-acclaimed folk dance company, whose passionate performances and soulful narratives are based on African slave history, samba, capoiera and carnaval, and comes from one of the most sensual places on the planet.
Nudity, schmudity.
This article appears in Jan 19-25, 2011.
Got something to say?
Send a letter to the editor and we'll publish your feedback in print!
More importantly – Paula, were the opera glasses needed?
In a materialistic society the naked body is misunderstood.
“my main concern is the women who wind up there for unhealthy reasons (self esteem issues, money problems, some sort of abuse, addiction issues, etc.) or who stay there for those reasons. I have to wonder what the majority of the dancers would say if you walked into the club and said “if I offered you an office job with comparable pay, would you quit this one?”””Money problems”? Money problems is why we ALL have jobs. And I don’t think your test of “if I offered you an office job with comfortable pay” is valid. Dairy farmers would take you up on that test, too. As would all fast food workers, some tradespeople, and MANY ARTISTS! In fact, I’m not sure many strippers would. Some make a lot more money than desk jockeys, and not everyone — including strippers — wants a DESK JOB.So you’ve made your point. You believe (without pointing to any studies except the one book you’ve read, which is anecdotal at best) that strippers have low esteem and are exploited.Have a good day.
@ Denali: Thank you for your insight and for contributing to the conversation; my opinions are much more likely to be swayed with intelligence, rather than stupidity.I’ll be the first to say that I don’t think strip clubs should be shut down. It’s a free country, allegedly. But I also don’t believe they’re a healthy environment the majority of the time and that’s why I initially spoke up. I know there are people who are exhibitionists who will always want to do a job like that (with or without pay); my main concern is the women who wind up there for unhealthy reasons (self esteem issues, money problems, some sort of abuse, addiction issues, etc.) or who stay there for those reasons. I have to wonder what the majority of the dancers would say if you walked into the club and said “if I offered you an office job with comparable pay, would you quit this one?” Conversely, I wonder how many of the dancers in this Brazilian piece would consider doing their work for free for the sake of the art (I have no idea what money they make, if any). My instincts tell me more of the Brazilian dancers would work for free (or some pitiful daily stipend), than the number of erotic dancers who would reject comparable pay at an office job. And if that is true, I have a problem with the reality that implies.For me, what this boils down to is what I originally said: the difference between an art performance containing nudity and a dance at a strip club is intent; the intent of the performer and the intent of the audience. My opinion is that the healthier job is the one that forces someone to think rather than the one that helps them get off.As for male strippers, of course they’re relevant to this conversation … especially considering the Brazilian piece features male and female nudity.
@BB – A lot of your statements are just as much generalizations and just as weak as the arguments of those you criticize. A good example being the "low self-esteem" generalization. Read "Candy Girl" by Diablo Cody. Great example of a stripper who doesn't pigeon-hole so well. I'm sure some strippers have self-esteem issues, but I'm also sure that some don't.
As far as objectification goes, that's fairly obviously the point. The genre of these establishments is "strip club". In other words, the idea is to go there to view nudity. The strippers themselves use pseudonyms and not their real names. It's not possible to do anything but objectify these people unless a patron could wheedle personal information out of them. Would the dancers be ok with us using their real names and giving real bio's on them? Seems unlikely. So in other words, in this particular role, most strippers would probably prefer to be objectified. How does that fit in with our characterization of strippers as being victimized? And what about sexism? I've noticed that we haven't broached the subject of male strippers. A small enough subset that it's irrelevant? Making that claim makes these arguments quite a bit thinner …
The real question is whether objectification is inherently bad. Framing the question is the fact that every person who took employment as a stripper knew they would be objectified. So if objectifying someone is inherently bad, even when they know they're being objectified and being paid for it, then strip clubs should be shut down. But it seems likely that we you walked into a strip club and asked every stripper if we should shut the place down, most if not all would say no. Would we shut them down anyway and claim that we know better than they do what's good for them?
Point being- It's not a black and white issue. Would I want my daughter to go to work as a stripper? No. Did I do things my parents did approve of? Yes. Do I feel bad about all those actions? Some yes, some no. As with most any question of ethics/morality, the waters are murky.
Art: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/6/6a/Mona_Lisa.jpgArt: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/c/ce/Marcel_Duchamp.jpgHappy?
Nah, a troll would have just called you a pompous d-bag.
The overall lesson here :If your Brazilian and dancing nude its art, if you’re Canadian and dancing nude you must have low self esteem.And yes BB it really sounds just as preposterous when you say it.
What I was correct about is that I am having fun at the expense of a dance troop who are : artists, atheletes, dedicated and serious ambassadors of the arts and their country. Please forgive me.
You are correct, Tim. The Brazilian dancers are not being objectified. Though not a word, they are being “subjectified.”At Stevo-O, that was a very troll-like comment, which surprises me. You’re better than that. If you want to knock me off my soapbox, do so by contributing to the argument, not by calling names.