Burlesque and cabaret are pretty popular in
London these days - huge hoards of women roll into darkened clubs and gym classes
are filled with women sliding down poles. And while burlesque dancing is
becoming more of a casual pastime, organisers are also doing well to promote
its status as a glitzy high-end performance. This week Crazy Horse Paris presents
its show Forever Crazy at the South Bank, an expensive and highly choreographed affair starring Kelly Brook.
I often love to watch these kinds of show
but do feel confused over what to make of this so-called art form. Is burlesque
another form of sexual exploitation or a way of championing the feminist cause?
Well, I think inevitably it can be either, or both. Arguably it comes down to
whether the particular burlesque show successfully subverts the conventions of other
forms of stripping, as well as the powerless spectacle of the female body more
generally.
Burlesque dancers do exert a certain amount
of power in that they choose their stage name, costume, and – perhaps more
importantly – how much flesh they show. Yet, a more significant area of
consideration is the nature of the performance itself. Arguably, burlesque
performances are far from a basic form of titillation, but subtle and
intelligent works of art.
Indeed, burlesque has a long history of
acting as a medium in which to explore the social and political issues of the
day. Clickety Split, for example, is a burlesque group from Chicago that make
statements on current issues such as abortion rights and war. And of course,
pretty much all performances can be said to explore the idea of femininity.
Sexual stereotypes and characters – such as the pin-up, housewife, and movie
star – are playfully exaggerated to the point of parody and humour.
In turn, the notion of the passive female is disrupted as the audience laughs
and interacts with the show. In fact, unpredictability and audience interaction frequently comes into play, as performers actively surprise and challenge people in
the crowd.
In addition, there tends to be different
types of femininity on show – including women covered in tattoos, with shaved
heads, and larger women. Shows can promote a diversity of shapes and sizes as well as personalities.
So perhaps burlesque can be seen as a way of
celebrating the female form without displaying it as a passive sexual object. It is often about sensuality and lightheartedness, as well as politics and
subversion. Of course, there will always be different forms and interpretations;
Dita Von Teese has more of a classic look, seeming submissive and almost
childlike in some of her acts. But I think, ultimately, it's important to have diversity. If something is to be creative, there can't be too many rules and set ideas.
Of course, the risk is that as more women perform burlesque and it
becomes more mainstream, it loses its creative and political edge - instead becoming full of one-dimensional routines,
bloated with clichés.
Like the idea of femininity, I think we
should strive to think of burlesque as an open-ended and actively creative medium,
full of play and humour.