Operational Definitions

BEFORE YOU BEGIN: OPERATIONAL DEFINITIONS FOR THIS SITE

One of the first things I learned when I began presenting programs and training in dance, business development and social issues, is that we all often think we are communicating when we are actually not communicating at all. I came to believe that part of the reason for this failure of communication was that, even when people thought they were discussing the same thing, they often were actually discussing separate ideas. And part of the reason for this was that no one had bothered to define the terms being discussed.

The same thing happens in the field of bellydance, fusion dance and their related variants, or inspired-by offshoots. For example, the term “bellydance” conjures up an image in all our minds; and that image can often vary drastically. Even our understanding of what that term means can be radically different. The same is true of fusion dance.

Having been involved in bellydance and its related styles and variants since 1975, and having studied folk/folkloric and theatre since 1970, I have seen many changes and cycles take place. I have also been at the forefront of some of these changes. I have seen the use of the term bellydance be used to define dance styles or types so far removed from the foundation dance as to be unrecognizable. I think we do ourselves and our dances a disservice when we try to cling to a name that does not define, and in fact in some cases limits, what we do.

While the focus on this site will be fusion dance, dance theatre and synthesized dance, the materials are relevant to dancers and educators of many forms and styles and we will frequently present articles on other dance forms related to fusion such as bellydance and tribal styles. Because of this, I am starting with operational definitions that will be used for the styles of dance addressed in our site.