dance skillz

Granted, I'm a "rockist" with nothing but a zealous middle finger for Janet Jackson and her brand of vaccuous chart pop, but I'll speak out: Can you HEAR dance moves on her albums? I thought not. Can you hear her whispy, meritless voice? Barely. Is it timeless music? Fuck no! Is it disposable product? You betcha.

It's all part of the live package for certain genres of music. You can certainly dismiss an artist's dance moves when it comes to the raw albums, but when seeing them in concert or in a video, it becomes more important.

I do HATE it when an artist spends so much time dancing that he/she sounds like ass, though (yes, Beyonce, I'M TALKING TO YOU).

Were Gene Kelly/Fred Astaire/Ginger Rogers/etc required to sing live while making American in Paris or Singing in the Rain? Of course not. Does this make them any less vital performers? Of course not. Reading post-Madonna POP STARS in terms of the values of 60s rock and roll authenticity makes no more sense than criticising a Busby Berkely musical for not being Chekov.

Uh, Motel? That's "Miss Jackson" if you're nasty.

I saw James Brown ( =original moonwalker) on TV last night and I could not believe what I was seeing. Tacked-on dance moves are a nice try; I'm certainly not going to criticize anyone for putting on a show for the crowd. But dancing as part of a holistic performance package w/the potential to explode yr head is v. rare nowadays; I can think of only Prince.

I think my favorite dance moves on stage were Bernard Sumner's for New Order 1989 -- he didn't really dance, per se, they were more just odd, fun little swirls and steps that looked exactly like the type of thing that shy me would do if given half the chance. I felt empathy. :-)

Stevie - I wasn't putting down the fact that some performers don't actually sing during their concerts, just using as part of the question. I do think it's odd to have the singing subjugated to the dancing in what is ostensibly a musical show, but I'm not outraged by it or anything. I don't remember bringing "60's rock and roll authenticity" into it.

I only have access to music from the computer and the few CDs I've bought, and that's not at all visual. (There's MTV, but who in their right mind would watch MTV?) I couldn't care less about dancing if the music is good. I actively dislike the few music videos I've seen from people I like (Nine Inch Nails, David Bowie) because they distract me from the songs.

Having bit my teeth on 80's video production values, I am definately a child of a Rythm Nation... But aside from my own mental Busby Berkley dreams, Dance has always been a code for youth, or more specifically - youth amped out, but vaguely in control (of money, sex, power, politics?)...

Exhibit A: Britanny Speares - her routines are extremely dated and conventional, this was stuff that Madonna/JJackson was doing 10-15 years ago, but it hasn't gone away or become passe. Why? Because the choreography still conveys success/youth/money/power/motion. Have any of you seen the Pepsi commercial? She's athletically and literally blowing the roof out of some pepsi-distributor plant, while dazed americans watch via TV, high as if on some cola fix. True, it's a pale imitation of Madonna's 'Like a Prayer' campaign a decade earlier (pushing sex, religion, race and pepsi) - however, Brittany's dumbed down the narrative to show us youth in ice-cold celebration (besides, the Material Girl was getting older and thinking more provacatively at that point...wonder if Brittany would do the same?)

So - why Madonna/Jackson moves and not Kate Bush? Why did we not progress past 'Modern Jazz' and all that shameless Fossee mugging and get into Butoh or some experimental moves? (Yes, I know Modern dance is kinda creepy - with it's emphasis on youthful, starved bodies, writhing unnaturally. It often has the same effect as mime at times). However, I have seen some mod-dance mated with music: I nearly fell over in my chair in the mid-80's when I saw Michael Clark's ballet for the Fall's 'Cropped It'.... Still Brilliant!!

I hardly think dance moves are necessary for most acts, but I did see Prince in a niteclub show last year, and my mind was blown at his athletic moves. He played and sang real good too. Yes, James Brown is the obvious antecedent, and I'd love to see him as well.

Saw Beck a couple years ago, and was pleasantly surprised to see some well-executed dancing by him.

Jason: the dance routine in Get Ur Freak On is very out. It's still basically in the Madonna/MJ group cheerleading genre, but atylized, big scary gaps and pauses. Would be really neat to see the "street team" style taken ever more abstract tho.

"Lateralus" is like really BAD "modern dance"...

Who will read this book for me? "Class Act: the Jazz Life of Choreographer Cholly Atkins." by Cholly Atkins and Jacqui Malone, Columbia Univ Press, $24.95. "The story of the jazz dance and tap master who taught Motown how to move"

OK: this iz a question of mine too, and I cannot understand those who simply argue that dance is some after the fact pin-on. Britney lives to dance: her music is merely a pretext, so's her loving fans can be at one with her hoofing. Why do we never ask the qeustion this why round? (Ans: cuz we kno fuck all abt dancing and have not yet read Cholly Atkins' book. We are rationalising our lamentable ignorance as superior taste.)

Thanks, Tracer - totally! I can only wonder if Fat Boy Slims anti- video 'Praise You' has had any affect? It kinda serves as a parody to both choreography and street dance...

Ha, buy me a copy and I'll read it, Mark. ;)

The presence of a Jarvis Cocker makes a pulp record all the mose astonishing.

and MTV's a great channel! it has kitch-expressionist sets and plays stereolab in the background. you just have to mute when the videos are on.

'anti-video'? then how about i just anti- watch it? fuck Fat Boy Slim.

I saw NSYNC dancing on some show today and It made me laugh out loud. I mean...reallly....it was just so ridiculous. I loved them for it. What clowns!

i heard their new album at the record store today. it was like, way bawdier than they usually are. and it sounded like funkstorung.

normaly I hate those silly dances with a passion *but* I quite like the dance in Aaliyah's 'We Need A Resolution', quite relaxed and beautiful, not the usual pseudo-fascistic anality of Jackson et al. Speaking of which, just checked out a bit of Janet's show on tv: bo- ho-ring. So you can all do the same stupid dance. It's just so 1982?

Dance routines = classic. Rock star swagger and sex/drugs/lifestyle = dud. Neither have anything to do with the music, but at least the former is occasionally visually impressive. Don't believe me? Watch "Baby, One More Time", and then watch Primal Scream's "Rocks".

(BTW, this is of course hyperbolic claptrap - I can count the amount of interesting dance routines in video clips over the last few years on my hands).

"Rock star swagger and sex/drugs/lifestyle = dud."

Now I've heard everything. I mean really.

I hate when threads turn into dumb dance-pop stereotypes vs dumb guitar-rock stereotypes - no one ever gains anything from those. Maybe my question sounded more hostile than necessary ? I don't know, I fail to see the part of what I said that implies that Janet Jackson and N'Sync should pretend to be Bob Dylan or Led Zeppelin when they're onstage. Surely there are more options than this anyhow ???

Patrick, my self-consciously silly - hey, I even admitted it - contribution was in response to Motel Hell (as was Stevie's, I imagine) rather than your initial question, which didn't seem hostile at all. It was (theoretically, at least) a parody, therefore automatically stupid and tiresome.

I don't even agree with what I was saying: the idea that "only the music matters" and that anything that interferes with the music is anathema is a myth, not necessarily a rockist one but certainly a widespread one. Obviously the visual/psychological effect of a live show or music video has almost as much to do with the way we perceive the music as the music itself. The line's repetition is made ironic by the continual attention that these apparently tangential issues are given by so many attempts at intelligent music criticism.

To answer the actual question: where I think the large scale dancing pop videos and live concerts tend to fall short is the lack of easy identifiability that you get with fashion/lyrics etc. that are pop's other modes of visual signification. Eg. everyone remembers Christina Aguilera's crimped afro but no-one remembers the dance from "Genie In A Bottle" - and why should they?

R&B and hip hop are the occasional exception to this rule by virtue of the dances often seeming so formal/fucked up/nihilistic, though again it's a shame that usually the big dances on the platforms tend to be the most conservative sections of the clips, whereas at least in something like "Baby One More Time" the dance is the culmination of the glorious processions of pop cliches.

Which brings me to my final point - I object to the automatic assumption that pop and rock cliches are stupid. They're like, GRATE, man (I actually love the "Rocks" clip, tho am slightly scared by it).