Pittsburgh Arts, Regional Theatre, New Work, Producing, Copyright, Labor Unions,
New Products, Coping Skills, J-O-Bs...
Theatre industry news, University & School of Drama Announcements, plus occasional course support for
Carnegie Mellon School of Drama Faculty, Staff, Students, and Alumni.
Studio 360: New York State’s highest court is mulling an answer to a question that has long plagued intellectuals: What separates art from mere entertainment? And in this particular case, what separates pole dance from dance?
This is a very interesting argument, actually. I have never thought of stripping as an art. I never actually thought about that debate before, either. Stripping was always just a form of dance that seemed degrading to me. Stripping, however, can be seen in many different ways. This article made me question if it is a choreographed dance or just movement...By the time I finished reading this article, I began questioning this and actually believing that stripping IS actually an art.
While stripping can be seen in a very negative light, and, as Nate said above, is degrading in many ways, I do believe that it is an art. As Stephen Sondheim quotes in his book "Look, I Made A Hat," "Art is skill in the service of passion." Before reading this article, I did not view stripping as an art, and most people would probably agree with me. However, after reading the article, Sondheim's quote came to mind, and stripping does in fact fill Sondheim's definition of art. Whether it is morally correct or not, people go to the theatre for inspiration, entertainment, and through that, they gain happiness. For some, seeing a play, an opera, or a ballet is fulfilling. For others, it may be going to a museum. While stripping is degrading, I do believe that it falls in the realm of art, and should therefore share in similar benefits as art's other entities.
I'm so torn on this one. I see what they are saying totally. I also think it takes an immense amount of skill to strip, and practice too. It is weird to me that this has not come up before. If strippers consider themselves dancers or even just entertainers shouldn't they have already filled to be part of a union. I think the biggest reason that stripping doesn't have rights is because most people don't want to believe that it exist so they don't want to even comprehend the rights it should receive. Stripping takes skill and I definitely think it is entertainment, but I don't know if I would go so far as to say it was art. But I do think that burlesque is art. The biggest difference between the two are connotation, purpose and venue. Even if it isn't pure "art" I do think that strip joints should get the same rights as everyone else, they are still working and deserve to be treated fairly no matter what your political stance on stripping is.
I think there are several ways of looking at this. Stripping can be seen as an art form, a form of exercise, or a way to just earn money. I, personally, don’t know if I consider it an art form because if you take away the physical act of taking off your clothing, it is dance. This all depends on what the show is, which really determines whether or not it is an art form. The important thing to know about dancers is that there is a lot of training that occurs before the show. The dancers are using their bodies to convey a message and to entertain the people. One could say the exact same thing about strippers, and I don’t doubt that it is equally as challenging. While I think that a stripper must get paid fairly well, I don’t know if it is worth it as a source of income. I understand when it is push come to shove but there is something about the whole idea that doesn’t settle well. I think that there are many others that are not comfortable with the idea and that gives them reason to ignore the similarities it has with other art forms. They would use their discomfort as the deciding factor to not to write off the tax for a strip club. In that case, I think that society’s insecurity of the matter and it is not a good enough reason to ignore this line of work.
I completely agree the Ms. Westbrook's statement. I am completely torn on this subject. Because while the by the base definition, stripping should fall under the same category as dance and ballet, but I have a hard time putting the New York Ballet troupe in the same category as exotic dancers. Pole dancers absolutely derserve the same rights for unionisation for hours and pay. But no one feel comfortable to admit they exist in a professional or in many social settings.
stripping whether or not you say it is an art it is a form of entertainment none the less and in my opinion a company of dancers who might actively remove clothing during a routine of dance moves centered around a pole should not be regarded differently then a ballet company. yes the dancers in the ballet company may have dancers with many more years of rigorous training but exotic dancers also have a lot of training and practice.
How is stripping not art? I've seen plenty of theatre, which has been considered and referred to as "art," even though I'd say it was pure entertainment. Why can't something entertaining be art? Does all art have to be depressing and serious? There is absolutely an art to stripping and exotic dancing. If nothing else, both of those practices are a fantastic example of the art of seduction. (And if you don't think that seduction is an art, then I don't think we can be friends.) Stripping is a performance. The major structural difference between stripping and theatre is that in theatre, the audience is drawn into the plot and characters; in a strip tease, the audience is drawn into the performer's aura.
I think this is a great argument! Who's to say what is and isn't art? Just because something is risque doesn't mean it is not art. At a certain point Elvis gyrating his hips was considered appalling and inappropriate: but today he is considered one of the best entertainers. Strippers entertain people often times more than tax-exempt community theaters.
At the same time though, can they be tax-exempt if they are a for-profit organization? While the dance companies could be not-for-profit, a strip joint is not. Isn't that enough reason for it to not be able to be tax-exempt?
A lot of people seem to say that stripping is a dance that is degrading. No body is FORCING anyone to strip. I dont see why it is degrading. From a third party you may look and see a moral issue in someone watching someone strip. The customer is paying to be there. The dancer is getting paid to dance. Its not slavery. Sometimes when I see people watching a musical about homeless people with terminal illness (Rent) you could say its the same moral situation. The audience is still paying, the actor is still getting paid.. and no one is being forced to be there.
Hmmm. Today I had a very long chat with Sean Groves about this article and I have come to my personal conclusion that I don't think that you can consider most stripping to be art because its purpose is commercial. Much like I don't really consider big giant shows like Spiderman or Shrek the Musical to be "art," at least by my own definition, I don't consider stripping to be art. Not all entertainment is art, sometimes it is just entertainment without very much value at all. That's what I consider stripping to be. Like Tim said, the New York City Ballet lives in a totally different world than exotic dancers do. They are just two completely different breeds. You don't even need to take it to the strictly disciplined level of the ballet. Stripping isn't art. It's for money only. It's a transaction.
This really is a very interesting discussion. Most people’s natural instinct is to say no it is not art but this decision comes mostly from the fact that most people consider stripping to be morally wrong. But when one actually starts to think about it one sees that there really are not that many differences it and many contemporary ballets. Is it the nakedness that makes it not art because many contemporary ballets are now experimenting with nakedness. I think that if it is done properly it can be considered art. The dancers require great skill in order to perform some of the moves. This is a hard topic for people to discuss because it is hard for them to detach there moral judgment from the issue.
This question has never crossed my mind and once I saw the question, I knew I needed to read this article. Is stripping really an art? In my mind, the answer is yes. To society as a whole, it very well may not be but that is because they associate negative ideas toward it and don't think of it as rehearsed pieces of work. It may not be your go to piece of culture, but nonetheless, it is culture. Also, I must give props to the lawyer for representing these adult entertainments instead of worrying about his political reputation.
While I think pole dancing and stripping can definitely be considered art forms I think that goal of the art form should have some impact on the tax exemption status. Its a hard argument to make these days though. The first thing to pop in to my head was that there is a huge difference between a staged dance for the purpose of performance and the slightly more questionable motives of the performances given at strip clubs which from what Ive heard aren't entirely limited to the stage. But with environmental theater becoming more common they are going to have a hell of a time arguing this one.
Stripping is not only and art, but a sport. The an=mount of tallent that goes into it is incredible and i think that the negative aspect surrounding it is sad. If you as most of those women they aren't there by preference. They're probably working harder than most for less money and not getting any personal gain from it. Not only that but if dancing is considered and regarded as an art then why wouldnt stripping be?
14 comments:
This is a very interesting argument, actually. I have never thought of stripping as an art. I never actually thought about that debate before, either. Stripping was always just a form of dance that seemed degrading to me. Stripping, however, can be seen in many different ways. This article made me question if it is a choreographed dance or just movement...By the time I finished reading this article, I began questioning this and actually believing that stripping IS actually an art.
While stripping can be seen in a very negative light, and, as Nate said above, is degrading in many ways, I do believe that it is an art. As Stephen Sondheim quotes in his book "Look, I Made A Hat," "Art is skill in the service of passion." Before reading this article, I did not view stripping as an art, and most people would probably agree with me. However, after reading the article, Sondheim's quote came to mind, and stripping does in fact fill Sondheim's definition of art. Whether it is morally correct or not, people go to the theatre for inspiration, entertainment, and through that, they gain happiness. For some, seeing a play, an opera, or a ballet is fulfilling. For others, it may be going to a museum. While stripping is degrading, I do believe that it falls in the realm of art, and should therefore share in similar benefits as art's other entities.
I'm so torn on this one. I see what they are saying totally. I also think it takes an immense amount of skill to strip, and practice too. It is weird to me that this has not come up before. If strippers consider themselves dancers or even just entertainers shouldn't they have already filled to be part of a union. I think the biggest reason that stripping doesn't have rights is because most people don't want to believe that it exist so they don't want to even comprehend the rights it should receive. Stripping takes skill and I definitely think it is entertainment, but I don't know if I would go so far as to say it was art. But I do think that burlesque is art. The biggest difference between the two are connotation, purpose and venue. Even if it isn't pure "art" I do think that strip joints should get the same rights as everyone else, they are still working and deserve to be treated fairly no matter what your political stance on stripping is.
I think there are several ways of looking at this. Stripping can be seen as an art form, a form of exercise, or a way to just earn money. I, personally, don’t know if I consider it an art form because if you take away the physical act of taking off your clothing, it is dance. This all depends on what the show is, which really determines whether or not it is an art form.
The important thing to know about dancers is that there is a lot of training that occurs before the show. The dancers are using their bodies to convey a message and to entertain the people. One could say the exact same thing about strippers, and I don’t doubt that it is equally as challenging.
While I think that a stripper must get paid fairly well, I don’t know if it is worth it as a source of income. I understand when it is push come to shove but there is something about the whole idea that doesn’t settle well. I think that there are many others that are not comfortable with the idea and that gives them reason to ignore the similarities it has with other art forms. They would use their discomfort as the deciding factor to not to write off the tax for a strip club. In that case, I think that society’s insecurity of the matter and it is not a good enough reason to ignore this line of work.
I completely agree the Ms. Westbrook's statement. I am completely torn on this subject. Because while the by the base definition, stripping should fall under the same category as dance and ballet, but I have a hard time putting the New York Ballet troupe in the same category as exotic dancers. Pole dancers absolutely derserve the same rights for unionisation for hours and pay. But no one feel comfortable to admit they exist in a professional or in many social settings.
stripping whether or not you say it is an art it is a form of entertainment none the less and in my opinion a company of dancers who might actively remove clothing during a routine of dance moves centered around a pole should not be regarded differently then a ballet company. yes the dancers in the ballet company may have dancers with many more years of rigorous training but exotic dancers also have a lot of training and practice.
How is stripping not art? I've seen plenty of theatre, which has been considered and referred to as "art," even though I'd say it was pure entertainment. Why can't something entertaining be art? Does all art have to be depressing and serious?
There is absolutely an art to stripping and exotic dancing. If nothing else, both of those practices are a fantastic example of the art of seduction. (And if you don't think that seduction is an art, then I don't think we can be friends.) Stripping is a performance. The major structural difference between stripping and theatre is that in theatre, the audience is drawn into the plot and characters; in a strip tease, the audience is drawn into the performer's aura.
I think this is a great argument! Who's to say what is and isn't art? Just because something is risque doesn't mean it is not art. At a certain point Elvis gyrating his hips was considered appalling and inappropriate: but today he is considered one of the best entertainers. Strippers entertain people often times more than tax-exempt community theaters.
At the same time though, can they be tax-exempt if they are a for-profit organization? While the dance companies could be not-for-profit, a strip joint is not. Isn't that enough reason for it to not be able to be tax-exempt?
A lot of people seem to say that stripping is a dance that is degrading. No body is FORCING anyone to strip. I dont see why it is degrading. From a third party you may look and see a moral issue in someone watching someone strip. The customer is paying to be there. The dancer is getting paid to dance. Its not slavery. Sometimes when I see people watching a musical about homeless people with terminal illness (Rent) you could say its the same moral situation. The audience is still paying, the actor is still getting paid.. and no one is being forced to be there.
Hmmm. Today I had a very long chat with Sean Groves about this article and I have come to my personal conclusion that I don't think that you can consider most stripping to be art because its purpose is commercial. Much like I don't really consider big giant shows like Spiderman or Shrek the Musical to be "art," at least by my own definition, I don't consider stripping to be art. Not all entertainment is art, sometimes it is just entertainment without very much value at all. That's what I consider stripping to be. Like Tim said, the New York City Ballet lives in a totally different world than exotic dancers do. They are just two completely different breeds. You don't even need to take it to the strictly disciplined level of the ballet. Stripping isn't art. It's for money only. It's a transaction.
This really is a very interesting discussion. Most people’s natural instinct is to say no it is not art but this decision comes mostly from the fact that most people consider stripping to be morally wrong. But when one actually starts to think about it one sees that there really are not that many differences it and many contemporary ballets. Is it the nakedness that makes it not art because many contemporary ballets are now experimenting with nakedness. I think that if it is done properly it can be considered art. The dancers require great skill in order to perform some of the moves. This is a hard topic for people to discuss because it is hard for them to detach there moral judgment from the issue.
This question has never crossed my mind and once I saw the question, I knew I needed to read this article. Is stripping really an art? In my mind, the answer is yes. To society as a whole, it very well may not be but that is because they associate negative ideas toward it and don't think of it as rehearsed pieces of work. It may not be your go to piece of culture, but nonetheless, it is culture. Also, I must give props to the lawyer for representing these adult entertainments instead of worrying about his political reputation.
While I think pole dancing and stripping can definitely be considered art forms I think that goal of the art form should have some impact on the tax exemption status. Its a hard argument to make these days though. The first thing to pop in to my head was that there is a huge difference between a staged dance for the purpose of performance and the slightly more questionable motives of the performances given at strip clubs which from what Ive heard aren't entirely limited to the stage. But with environmental theater becoming more common they are going to have a hell of a time arguing this one.
Stripping is not only and art, but a sport. The an=mount of tallent that goes into it is incredible and i think that the negative aspect surrounding it is sad. If you as most of those women they aren't there by preference. They're probably working harder than most for less money and not getting any personal gain from it. Not only that but if dancing is considered and regarded as an art then why wouldnt stripping be?
Post a Comment