The impetus for this article was the fact that there is a restaurant in Cambridge, Massachusetts, which makes money off presenting up to four dancers every Wednesday night. It is not presented as "amateur" or "student" night, where one would perhaps expect the dancers not to be paid. Instead these are dancers who call themselves professionals (and in some instances, really are). The restaurant would probably be empty were it not for the dancers. There is live music, but the band alone would not support the attendance. Conditions of dancing there are abysmal, there is no respect given the dancer by the general audience, and it is not a feather in one's cap to say she is dancing there. I took a lot of heat from dancers who contend that if they asked for money then they couldn't get a job (untrue in some of the cases!), translating to: "I'm not worth it" which translates to "Then don't call yourself a professional." (The mystery is why truly professional dancers do dance there!) There was a large outpouring of support (funny enough, couched in anonimity -- dancers didn't want other dancers to know they agreed with me), I'd say with at least a 4-1 margin! Hence I took pen in hand and wrote this article.

I do want to say, however, that there is another restaurant which has entertainment three nights a week, one of which is unpaid for the dancers. But here the restaurant and customers respect the dancers, conditions are really good, and the band respects and works with each dancer to tailor the show to her liking. This restaurant, unlike the other, is not making money off the dancers, as it is a wonderful restaurant which would have its fill of customers on a weeknight whether or not there were dancers and music. The dancers are a mix of amateur professionals and professionals. The professional dancers who dance on this unpaid night are those who normally prefer not to perform on weekends, who might be returning to the stage after many years away from it, who use this performance opportunity sort of as an audition to get to know the owner in order to earn a weekend spot, or who want to dance there for the pure pleasure of performing with this band. The two situations are eons away from one another, even though both are unpaid performances. And that is what dancers have to understand when they make a decision to take a job where they will not get paid. Some jobs may enhance your dancing experience (as in the latter) and some jobs will cheapen it.

This article was not easy in flowing from my head to my fingertips... it kept getting detoured at my heart. As I was the instigator of this discussion, you wouldn't think that would be the case. But various responses made me think long and hard about my position - that dancers should be paid for performances where the venue is making money off the dancers - and still I came up with that same conclusion. The response to my e-mails also made me realize that not only am I not alone in my convictions, but that it is a problem all around this country. I have spoken with many dancers, have researched other articles, and have documented various e-mails. Dancers who have written e-mails have generously agreed to allow me to quote them, and are referenced at the end of this article.

Some dancers insist that dancing for the joy of it automatically excludes also making money from it. Let me start this article by quoting Ne-Kajira Jannan : "We all dance for love, or we would not be doing it...(however) Each time we denigrate a dancer for expressing a desire to earn money, we denigrate not only ourselves, but the dignity of the art."( footnote #1)   Receiving payment in exchange for your service (as a dance performer) is an issue of dignity, not an absence of it. It is not an issue of being mercenary but of being valued. Schelli put it this way: "...by not accepting money, I was telling everyone that I wasn't worth much as a dancer...I realized a strange quirk in human nature...people tend to not think they are getting something of value unless they compensate you for it somehow...I noticed that people want to keep the dignity of giving something in return for getting something."(footnote #2)   Karen Miller (Karina) states: "We have fought for so many years to bring respect to the name of our art form...How will society respect our art form if it is too often virtually given away-as if it has no value?"(footnote #3)  "Acting irresponsibly ensures bellydance will continue to be a low paying, less respected performance art."(footnote #4)    When we as professional dancers want to receive pay for performance, it is not that we love the dance any less than dancers who do not demand payment. In fact, we love the dance enough to respect it and ourselves. This is not an issue of love versus money. It is an issue of love equaling value, respect, and dignity.

The issue of needing places with an accepting audience is another issue that I thought long and hard about. Nourhan Sharif states: "I am not just going to perform (dance) anywhere I happen to have an audience."(footnote #5) To dance in a money-making venue for no wage cheapens the dancers and the dance. "Hold yourself cheaply and so will everyone else...nobody values what they get at bargain basement rates!"(footnote #6)   Dancers who think they are doing a service to other dancers by dancing for nothing (in other words, opening up venues to dancers that would not ordinarily be open because they would not pay dancers), think again. "Dancers working together can create work for themselves, generate better wages, and keep expanding performance opportunities. Dancers who undersell and undermine diminish performance opportunities for everyone, keep wages low and make it difficult to create new markets for dance."(footnote #7)

Why does it happen that insisting on payment for performance actually OPENS more paying venues? Here I take a portion from one of Morocco's articles to explain this concept: "They [dancers who dance only for tips or for free] don't realize that they are cheapening themselves, minimalizing their talent and their art form...Performers who dance for free (at other than charities or old age homes) are looked down on by the very people that exploit their idiocy. Dancing just for tips is begging, rather than accepting tribute for artistry...he [boss at such a nightclub] tells me that the calibre of the audience has fallen tremendously...I [Morocco] explain that if you put on a cheap show, you get a cheap audience or none at all. It's great to hire talented semi-amateurs, as long as there's also a strong, competent professional on the bill. Then the patrons won't feel cheated. Audiences are much more discerning than he gave them credit for and won't accept skim milk at whipped cream prices."(footnote #8)

What does this have to do with opening OTHER venues to dance? Well, restaurant owners who might be considering putting in bellydancers will most likely check out the places that already have them. If they see that the dancers are not the highest calibre (because the ones who are won't be dancing for free) and neither is the audience (I'm sorry - but patrons who throw their cigarette butts on the floor and steal tips, are NOT high calibre) they will decide not to allow dancers into their establishment. But, if they see that the dancers are truly professional, add to the ambience of the restaurant, and bring in nice customers, they are more likely to add belly dancing to their establishment. "When club and restaurant owners see that family and couple business increases with quality dancers, the ringing of their cash registers will be sweet music to their ears and they'll continue to hire quality."(footnote #9)

In addition, if an owner pays for higher calibre dancers, he is more likely to turn the establishment over to an amateur night every month. But if he is already featuring amateur dancers who dance for nothing, why should he devote any more time to having dancers? In this case, it is the venue itself that has the potential to expand. While it is true that there may be less restaurants and nightclubs now than years ago, and more dancers now than years ago, this statement is only a half-truth. Older dancers have worked hard to make this an acceptable art form. There are places today that never would have allowed belly dancing years ago. The venues for the amateur dancers have actually dramatically increased. Years ago bellydancers would never have been allowed to dance at libraries, museums, or public schools. I don't ever remember in the 70's there being a "showcase" or "gala" for anyone other than the professionals themselves. I don't ever remember fund raising events where the talent were dancers and Middle Eastern musicians.

I firmly believe that the beauty of bellydancing is that it is open to all women. Unfortunately there is a "look" that most club owners and, to a lesser extent, restaurant owners, are looking for. That is not unreasonable. Art is audience-driven. What is expected by the audience is what the owners will hire. I think too many dancers, however, sell themselves short in thinking that the look has only to do with height, coloring, weight, or age. The "look" also encompasses stage presence, costuming, demeanor, and dignity. It is true that many of us will not be hired because of the superficial look (youth, coloring, and weight, being the most obvious) that is wanted. But I think the issue runs deeper than that. Because dancers THINK that they don't have the "look" and will not be hired for money, they are the first in line to offer to dance for free or for very little. If all dancers stood firm and said "I'm a professional dancer, I am worth being paid, I am a fantastic enough entertainer that your audience will love me regardless of my ____ (fill in the blank)," then club owners would not only have these women dance in their establishments, but pay them as well. If owners pay for, and present, these dynamite professional dancers, then they are whom the audience will demand. The look will be one of professionalism, stage presence, charm, and excitement. The dignity of the dancer is what will drive the audience, and what will ultimately drive who is hired.

If a dancer does not possess all those qualities: professionalism, stage presence, charm, and excitement (included in all these qualities, of course, is professional costuming, talent, and expertise) then maybe that dancer should not take up a professional spot where the owner of the venue makes money off of the dancer. For these dancers there are local dance events, haflis, nursing homes, hospitals, school and library events, charities, in-house parties, etc. Dancing in a professional place (and especially without wages) does not make you a professional dancer. It is your presence, your calibre, and your dignity that makes you a professional.

The more things change the more we have to fight to keep some of them the same. It is not better to be "the best looking and cheapest scenery over the most talented and more expensive dancer."(footnote #10)   It is not better to turn dancers into "commodities...(with) no acknowledgement of the quality of the dance only who will work for the cheapest prices."(footnote #11)   It is not better to dance for no wages. It is not better to beg to dance even though you don't have "the look."

I would never ridicule or harass my students for dancing in a money-making venue for no wages. I understand the thrill of dancing with live music with an audience. What I would try to instill in them - along with good posture and stage presence - is the dignity that stands behind those things that make a dancer a beautiful empowered woman. The student herself may eventually come to the conclusion that it is best not to give it away. That is part of the learning process and part of the development of self-esteem which makes the student honor her achievements, her skill, her strength, and her very own unique look. This strength and dignity is what we "older" dancers from the 70's and 80's have best to teach to our students.

I could have written this article totally from my own heart, head, and voice. But I thought it was important to use some documentation so that the readers would realize that this article is not "ONE Teacher's Opinion," but MANY teachers' opinions.

-----------------------------

1)Ne-Kajira Jannan (1998) "Bellydance Production Guidelines."

2) Schilli Nimtz (2000) - e-mail to med-dance@world.std.com, RE: TEA Teachers View.

3) Karen Miller (2000) - e-mail to bellydancema@egroups.com, RE: payment for performances

4) Ne-Kajira Jannan (1999) "Ethics in Dancing"

5) Nourhan Sharif(2000) - e-mail to bellydancema@egroups.com, RE: payment for performances

6) Morocco (1982) "If Prices Are Up All Over, Why are Oriental Dancers Getting Less?" Fantasia, Vol. 5, #5, Sept/October. Also available at http://www.tiac.net/users/morocco/pricesup.html, p.5.

7)Ne-Kajira Jannan (1999) "Ethics in Dancing."

8) Morocco (1995) Shimmy Chronicles, also available at http://www.tiac.net/users/morocco/tipping.html, p.3.

9) Esther (2000) e-mail to med-dance@world.std.com, RE: Organizing (was Union).

10) Tamara (2000) e-mail to med-dance@world.std.com, RE: Mid-Bits (originally was Organizing).